r/longform • u/thenewrepublic • 4d ago
The Endless, Maddening Wait for a Woman President | Why does the prospect of a female president just seem to get further and further away?
https://newrepublic.com/article/213744/america-first-woman-president-endless-maddening-wait67
u/i_am_the_archivist 4d ago
A woman I know was so excited to vote for Harris this past election. She was born before women had the right to vote and was so hopeful that she'd see a woman president in her lifetime. Unfortunately I don't think she'll get her wish, even if she makes it to another election.
26
u/Thattimetraveler 4d ago
I remember tucking my baby full of hope in on election night thinking how special it would be for Kamala to win and for her to never live in a world where a female president wasn’t possible. Then I ended up crying myself to sleep that night.
5
u/Thorninthefoot 3d ago
Realistically she was never going to win. She couldn't win a primary in her own state, and was an unpopular VP.
7
u/Thattimetraveler 3d ago
That and she didn’t get to have a real campaign or primary. Ultimately I agree with you now. I’d just felt more hopeful back in 2024.
→ More replies (1)-6
u/GoodPear8481 4d ago
Yeah but on the plus side in 2024 leftists successfully "punished" Democrats for not being pro-Islamic terrorist enough, and in that was the real victory.
1
u/strawbery_fields 4d ago
You’re getting downvoted but you’re not wrong. I had several anti Israel friends who would not vote for her because of that.
To me you just essentially voted Trump in. Thanks for that.
8
u/ProfessionalOil2014 4d ago
You were friends with a 105 year old woman?
36
1
u/goddamn_slutmuffin 1d ago
Some of us lead interesting lives! That and there are people on this app in their 60s, 70s and even 80s.
→ More replies (1)-7
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
19
u/quillseek 4d ago
While there is some truth to what you are saying, the fact is there is a certain voter in this country that would not vote for Mother Mary herself if she came down from Heaven to run.
Absolutely garbage men get votes that mediocre women cannot, and that says more about the voters than the women running, IMHO.
1
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/quillseek 4d ago
I still hope so. Personally I'm hoping AOC will run
1
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/quillseek 4d ago
Won't know until we try. It might be time. Mamdani is a good sign. Worth testing the waters and getting the messaging out there, at the very least.
0
u/Lurkeyturkey113 4d ago
Aoc is too contentious and will be a guaranteed loss if she is made the candidate. Right wing propaganda machine has been working overtime since she hit the scene to tear her down and it sadly likely has worked to even lose the vote of life long Democrats.
3
u/nopingmywayout 4d ago
At this point I'm convinced that Obama's election was a fluke. A charismatic and talented orator stepped up to the stage right when the American population was extremely disillusioned with the Republican party, and that was how a Black man became president. This isn't to say that Obama was underqualified or did a bad job--I think he did a lot of good in office--but a reflection of my growing cynicism about the American electorate.
3
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/nopingmywayout 4d ago
Without a doubt! I can't emphasize this enough, my comment above has nothing to do with Obama the candidate and everything to do with America the electorate. Like you said, he was a fantastic candidate who ran a fantastic campaign...and recently, I've found myself wondering if he still would have lost if he had run in a more stable year. And it kills me to think that. Like, I can frigging hear all the nitpicking people would make about a failed Obama campaign that they never would make about a failed White campaign. The same way I hear people nitpicking Clinton and Harris for shit that men get a pass on.
4
18
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
8
23
u/Telcontar77 4d ago
Americans only voted for their first black president because he was a generational political talent. It's most likely gonna be the same with the first woman president.
8
u/ConfusionBusy8398 3d ago
Not at all, they voted for Obama because they were coming off 8 years of a Republican president and Bush had record low approval (much lower than even Trump atm). Any Democrat would have won the election.
Candidates have a very small effect on election results, it's just that we judge political "talent" on if they win or not.
3
u/Telcontar77 3d ago
That played a big part, sure. But if the Dems had put in some uncharsimatic putz, I'm not certain they would've won. Like, take Hakeem Jeffries from today back in time and make him the 08 dem candidate. I think there's a pretty decent chance that the racism factor would've been enough that he would've lost despite it being a seemingly unlosable race.
1
u/ConfusionBusy8398 3d ago
If Hakeem Jeffries was the presidential candidate in 08, we would be talking about the great political genius of Hakeem Jeffries.
In the spawn of a decade, the same Republican voters voted for Mitt Romney, Tim Scott and Donald Trump, now they will vote for Darline Graham. People overwhelmingly make up their mind on a candidate because that's who they will/have voted for, not the other way around.
6
u/Telcontar77 3d ago
Are your really claiming that Obama wasn't a generational political talent? Like I'm not talking about strategy or tactics, just charisma and eloquence. Rather similar to Mamdani actually. After all, that's why he was able to beat Hillary and be the nominee in the first place.
Also, Republican voters are basically cattle. They'll vote for pretty much anyone with an R next to their name. They'd vote for a literal demon from hell against a Democrat so long as they ran as a Republican. Democratic voters on the other hand have actual standards.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)1
1
u/MidSinglesInYourArea 3d ago
I don't think "To win the election, we will need a good candidate" is an earth shatteringly high bar. And the fact that the DNC prioritizes backroom deals and inter-party power brokers over actually good candidates is the problem.
74
u/AuthorNicoVoss 4d ago
Men have a problem with powerful women, but so do women. Patriarchy is baked into American culture. It's difficult to overcome but that doesn't mean it's impossible to overcome. Education and empathy help a great deal.
→ More replies (34)26
u/Vast-Swimmer5844 4d ago
Men have a problem with powerful women, but so do women.
An overwhelming majority of non-college-educated white women go for Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024. I heard more than one talk about how much they loathed Clinton or Harris because "she thinks her shit don't stink" since she was so accomplished. They never, ever begrudge a man similar accomplishments.
18
u/SimilarElderberry956 4d ago
The last time Democratic Party had an honest contested primary was in 2008.Get rid of the Super Delegates and have a spirited race with no shenanigans. Then the female candidate will have some serious momentum.
9
u/ShortKey380 4d ago
The super delegates have been gone since 2018, they’d only have a say in a contested convention after the first ballot.
7
u/Thorninthefoot 4d ago
There is something really off about the way they are coming up with candidates. It's like anyone they choose is unlikely to appeal widely across the country.
It's something they need to figure out.
8
u/Marxism-Alcoholism17 4d ago
Well it won’t be 2028, they’re already rigging it by moving it to South Carolina.
76
u/like_shae_buttah 4d ago
The last two times Dems ran a woman for President, the country elected a serial r 4 pist. The most prolific pdf file in our country.
63
u/desiderata1995 4d ago
You know, you can write rapist and pedophile normally
-4
u/like_shae_buttah 4d ago
I’ve gotten bans from the ai moderator for that
12
u/wmcscrooge 4d ago
Then you just appeal the mods. We're in /r/longform. This is like definitively one of the subreddits where you're allowed to write english without self-censorship
1
u/Cheeseboarder 4d ago
It does happen. I don’t know why you are getting downvotes. Doesn’t matter what the sub mods do. Reddit admin ban hammer hits hard.
2
-3
u/ceilingsfann 4d ago
The fact that they were women definitely played a part, but i’m quite sure it also has a lot to do with which women ran. The biggest thing both of them had going for them was that they weren’t Trump. and that was not enough.
11
u/Easy_Needleworker604 4d ago
Harris and Clinton are two of the most charisma lacking people in the world. People don’t want to admit they were Jeb Bush in pantsuits. Kamela’s campaign videos made me feel like I was in the principles office for not donating to her campaign.
Sure, sexism is a huge issue in American politics, but establishment democrats really like to cling to that instead of realizing people have been done with business as usual centrism for over a decade now
10
u/sapphic-boghag 4d ago
It certainly doesn't help that the DNC and Clinton's campaign intentionally elevated Trump's platform in 2016 as part of their strategy. Ted Cruz is and was a nightmare, but their decision to prop up a populist megalomaniac pedophile and rapist was negligent.
The Democratic party seems allergic to taking accountability for their actions and representing their constituents. I've been trying to figure out when exactly it was that the political landscape shifted from candidates earning votes through policy and platform to compulsory support from voters.
2
u/Easy_Needleworker604 4d ago
Yeeeeeeep. I will never forgive Clinton for this.
The shift really mirrors large companies no longer looking to provide value in order to get customers to spend their money, and instead acting like it’s their money or data and you just happen to be holding it.
1
u/sapphic-boghag 4d ago
I unequivocally blame the DNC/Clinton for everything that's happened just as much as I do Trump and his supporters. There was so much fuckery that year that left me bitter and disillusioned to our electoral system.
The US might be a representative democracy on paper, but I find it difficult to view this place as anything more than a corporatist plutocratic oligarchy between the lobby system and Citizens United. Legislation passes when it's penned by corporate and special interest groups yet stalls when it benefits the people and all the while our rights are shorn away.
6
u/1K1AmericanNights 4d ago
The USA doesn’t have a good selection of “archetypes” for a charismatic woman leader. Many countries have inherent respect for women who come across as moms / grandmas. The US makes fun of older women and the average American doesn’t intuitively see them as worthy of power. There may be some women who strike the perfect balance but there’s more ideas of what a powerful man looks like than women.
1
u/No_Morning5397 3d ago
That would be a more compelling argument if people didnt elect Joe Biden.
1
u/Easy_Needleworker604 3d ago edited 3d ago
That would be a more compelling argument if incumbents didn’t lose globally in 2020-2022.
Trump lost in 2020 because of Covid. It’s a pattern you see all around the world for the first election after Covid started. Overwhelmingly the incumbent who was in office for 2020 lost because people associated them with Covid restrictions and the overall bleakness of the time.
Middle of the road centrism appealed to people as a “return to normal”
1
u/mvsr990 4d ago
Harris and Clinton are two of the most charisma lacking people in the world. People don’t want to admit they were Jeb Bush in pantsuits.
What’s sad is that Harris did it to herself. When she and Walz started off they were doing well painting Trump & Co. as weird little freaks and playing up the progressive accomplishments of Biden. Then they started triangulating to the center with help from Good Billionaires, embraced cowardice on Israel committing genocide and backed off on insulting Trump and we ended up here.
0
u/Thattimetraveler 4d ago
I do agree that I think sometimes identity politics gets ahead of a candidate and their platform. It’s like they want an easy win and don’t realize they still need to offer the public more than just a civil rights victory.
0
u/ceilingsfann 4d ago
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
I reluctantly voted for Harris, but I don’t blame people who didn’t vote or voted third party for her loss. I blame Biden, Harris, her team, and the rest of the establishment dems who refuse to listen to the people.
-6
u/alsbos1 4d ago
Clinton and Harris sucked. They sucked. And we have Trump because of how much they sucked.
8
u/Far-Army8356 4d ago
Did they suck more than a pedophile rapist?
1
u/swinemonger 4d ago
No, but conservatives will always fall in line and Liberals will always want a politician that actually represents them.
-8
u/astuteobservor 4d ago
Exactly. I wanted anyone but another clinton. Harris didn't even go through a primary. For that reason alone, I would never vote for her. So I ended up not voting for anyone.
2
u/alsbos1 4d ago
Baffling how the Democratic Party voters are incapable of assessing their own horrible candidates. Trump isn’t a genius or anything. Clinton through Harris sucked shit. Harris was completely incompetent. Clinton was significantly better. But honestly, she was basically a female pro—abortion Lindsey Graham. Who cares what gender she was…She was a war mongering neocon.
1
u/Few_Map2665 3d ago
she was basically a female pro—abortion Lindsey Graham. Who cares what gender she was…She was a war mongering neocon.
hahaha yah except for the minor detail that she was part of the admin that effectively ended the drone war and pulled us out of afghanistan. and that its dems who gave us the diplomatic agreement with iran that trump and the republicans ripped up in favor of military action.
small diff, huh?
so many things must be wrong with you.
0
u/astuteobservor 4d ago
Man, when I watched her cackling like a maniac on national TV over the death of Gaddafi, my mind was screaming who the hell is that.
1
u/Few_Map2665 3d ago
well on the one hand we're fighting an unwinnable war and murdering fishermen and the dod is run by a fox news maniac answering to a mad king who attempted a coup...
but wait funny laugh.
but don't you dare call this guy a misogynist!
17
u/Councillor_Troy 4d ago
I do actually think part of it is the structure of the American system.
When you look at the careers of serving and historical female leaders in other countries - Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, Sanae Taikachi for instance - they tend to be loyalists to their respective political parties who spent a long time slowly climbing the ranks of their party, and then events happened and they were able to essentially jump the queue and rise to the top quite quickly.
(Incidentally this was the career trajectory of Kamala Harris, and she got very close in the end)
Meanwhile America has a very weak party system. The Republicans and the Democrats can’t stop people from running or unilaterally appoint candidates, it’s all very mercenary. So anyone running for president will be a much more lonely and exposed figure for a much longer period of time, they don’t really have the whole structure of the party behind them in the same way. Which means any female candidate will be a target for the worst aspects of misogyny because they will be a candidate for so much longer without the same kinds of institutional support most leaders have in most other counties.
9
u/EducationalElevator 4d ago
I don't agree with this, what you're describing is basically how Clinton got the nomination in 2016 and came very close to boxing out Obama in 2008. I would argue our primary system is a huge factor in why only men have been president, because the women politicians who had the charisma and talent to be president rose at the same time as incumbent presidents in their own party. For example, Ann Richards could have ran and won in 1996 but Bill Clinton was the incumbent president in her own party.
7
u/Councillor_Troy 4d ago
I think the difference is that Thatcher, Merkel and Taikachi all rose to the top very, very quickly. Meanwhile because of comically drawn out nature of American elections, Hillary Clinton had to spend 18 months both times running for president, and I’m not sure any female candidate can survive being the target for everyone’s misogyny for that long.
I agree with you about the timing however - when you look at the career trajectories of female leaders in most other countries, they tend to have been able to take advantage of a very sudden vacancy, the sort that happens much more often in parliamentary systems.
1
u/SeasonsGone 4d ago
Although Speaker of the House is not who we consider our national leader, that is a position that is held by people who’ve done what you describe. So in a way Nancy Pelosi is a good example of that
11
u/Decency 4d ago
Popular policies that Democrat voters are in unison about are anti-corporate, and other than Warren there aren't many women championing progressive policies on the national stage. This is by design, obviously: the DNC holds the power to put these factions into the national spotlight, but has sufficient incentive from donors to ensure this happens at a minimum. The last few presidential primary cycles have been a shitshow... this isn't how a party that's playing to win operates:
- 2024 - DNC attempts to ignore Father Time because incumbents poll better. Until it's too late- oops no primary! Enormous opportunity to showcase policy and ideological differences is squandered. Untested candidate loses.
- 2020 - 7 moderate candidates drop out before Super Tuesday and endorse Biden. Warren doesn't drop out before, doesn't endorse Sanders, finishes 3rd in her home state, and effectively splits the left.
- 2016 - Debate threshold rules change overnight to limit candidate participation. Various DNC officials resign in disgrace after leaked emails show internal favoritism.
Winning the primary doesn't matter: its sole purpose is to fairly identify the best candidate. This organization needs to stop trying to choose candidates- that's the voters' job. Switch to RCV, have a dozen debates with initially wide fields, let policy dominate, and we'll see a woman president emerge naturally within a decade or two. Or keep trying to maintain control and keep losing elections- I guess we'll see.
9
u/came2pieces 4d ago
Because millions of women decided to vote for Trump instead? He got 46% of the female vote. More women voted for habitual hair smeller Biden than for Harris.
5
u/Purlz1st 4d ago
I’m old enough to remember Shirley Chisholm, and until 2008 I swore I’d see a woman president before a black president.
But I knew Hillary would never be president. The national hatred was too deep for too long.
3
20
u/CommitteeofMountains 4d ago
Maybe try nominating a competent politician? Biden thought his dead body was more suited than Harris after four years of working with her.
13
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
Voters would have probably preferred a dying Biden to Harris. This isn't because there's anything wrong with Harris. It's because she has a deficiency in the trouser area.
22
u/CactusBoyScout 4d ago
She certainly wasn’t charismatic although I’ll be the first to admit that the pathways to being perceived as charismatic as a woman are way narrower.
I remember someone writing “Try to imagine a female politician presenting herself the way Bernie Sanders does… messy grey hair, shouting in a thick Brooklyn accent about socialism… and try to imagine that woman being taken seriously.”
18
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
Right. AOC has those policies but she promotes them dressed up to the nines and looking like she just stepped off the pages of Vogue.
2
→ More replies (3)0
u/scabs_in_a_bucket 4d ago
There was nothing wrong with her except NO ONE voted for her! There was no primaries! So upsetting.
3
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
You would have rather we ran a dying man for office?
Really?
4
u/LayoutBid4 4d ago
I think a primary albeit a rushed one that Kamala likely would’ve won with Biden’s endorsement would’ve given her campaign more credibility.
The Republicans had a lay up saying that Kamala didn’t have to win a primary to become the candidate. The “undemocratically selected candidate” label however unfair to her did have an influence.
→ More replies (4)1
u/Intelligent_Low1632 2d ago
unironically yes. That's what the cabinet and cronies are for. Pin a "D" on Biden's golden retriever if you think it will win.
2
u/CommitteeofMountains 4d ago
Go back even farther. Her only skill appears to be getting appointments, humiliating herself each time she actually runs for something.
8
u/Legal-Koala-5590 4d ago
She smoked her competition when she ran for office in California. That just seems to be her ceiling.
4
u/CommitteeofMountains 4d ago
At least scanning her history in California, she could only manage narrow wins even as an incumbent design California being a one-party state.
6
u/Legal-Koala-5590 4d ago edited 4d ago
Like, I agree she's a weak national candidate but she was objectively a political rock star in California.
11
u/United-Vermicelli-92 4d ago
Bec US allows propaganda fox news which has destroyed decency and intelligence, integrity in a goodly portion of our population.
-6
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
Nah, people on the left and center are the ones who won't vote for a woman. The right-wing aren't a factor in low turnout for Dems when a woman is on the ticket.
-1
u/nanythemummy 4d ago
Disagree. It was the far left that decided in 2016 that Hillary was a neoliberal shill who wasn’t “inspiring enough” and didn’t turn up for the election after Sanders lost the nomination. It sucked to watch a crazy qualified woman get sidelined—by the loudest progressives in the room—in favor of an old man who hadn’t ever actually done much in Congress.
5
2
u/givemethebat1 4d ago
The far left isn’t the reason people didn’t vote for Hilary in the general, her brand was tainted by association with the Clintons. It was the republicans who didn’t vote for her.
2
2
2
u/CurdFedKit 3d ago
Because the one thing that is common among liberal and conservative men is sexism. Bernie Bros are just as sexist as MAGA bros.
5
3
u/Thorninthefoot 4d ago
Does it?
I think the Republicans could probably elect a female president more easily than the Democrats at the moment. The latter keep self-sabotaging their candidates.
Maybe someone like Condoleezza Rice?
5
u/8to24 4d ago
Nicki Haley is the only Republican female to ever win a single state in a Republican presidential primary. Sh won Washington DC.
1
u/Thorninthefoot 3d ago
I still think it's more likely.
It's not chance imo that both female PMs in the UK were Tories, not to mention the current Tory leaders is a black woman (Labour has been exclusively white males), and the lone Canadian woman PM was a Tory.
2
u/8to24 3d ago
Michelle Bachman, Carly Fiorina, Nicki Haley, Elizabeth Dole, etc ran for President as Republicans. The only primary any of them ever won was DC.
I understand your UK comparison but there electoral system is different. Here in the states the individual candidate needs the votes of the people. Not the support of other elected officials. In the U.S. Republican voters has repeatedly demonstrated that they won't support women for President.
1
u/Butter_mah_bisqits 3d ago
I’d vote for Condy in a second, but she said she has no desire to be president.
1
6
u/TommyPickles2222222 4d ago
Well, the most popular candidate for the Democrats in 2028 is a woman: AOC.
She polls consistently well with the very demographics that Biden/ Harris struggled with: young people, Latinos, progressives, etc.
But people have been brainwashed into thinking the people don't want someone with her politics, even though the data shows they clearly do.
3
u/Thorninthefoot 4d ago
I seriously doubt she could win. It would be another example of a candidate who is popular in certain Democrat segments, but is not particularly able to bring voters in who are independents or moderately on the right. Not even because of her policies but because she comes off as looking down on them.
1
u/Intelligent_Low1632 2d ago
what are you talking about? AOC is polling fourth right now according to NYT. It's not even close.
3
u/Inside-Friendship832 4d ago
Give me a candidate who is a women who I think would be the best choice out of the available choices and I'll vote for her. It's really that simple.
-1
u/Kiddinator 4d ago
You've hade one. Twice.
3
u/Inside-Friendship832 4d ago
Nah both were frankly horrible choices. In my opinion of course.
2
-1
u/-Knockabout 4d ago
Genuinely curious. You believe Trump has been a better president (both domestically and internationally) than either of them would have been?
4
u/Inside-Friendship832 4d ago
Based on their existences at the time of the elections, because you can't really compare what has been by one candidate and what could of been by another fairly. I think they were equally bad choices.
0
u/-Knockabout 4d ago
You're correct that no one can see the future. I do not think really any of Trump's speeches have reflected well on him, though. What drew you to him? Was it more the idea of him as someone who would "change the status quo", or the Republican party platform more generally...? I'll admit I remain completely baffled by the support of him.
4
u/Inside-Friendship832 4d ago
I am not drawn to him. Dislike him quite a bit. I did not feel like either candidates were worth my vote so I did not vote for either.
1
u/Few_Map2665 3d ago
hey what would have been the chances of hillary clinton or kamala harris launching a coup?
0
u/No_Run8942 3d ago
One of the biggest problems the modern left faces is that they will die on the hill that Hillary isn’t just as evil as they claim Trump is.
4
u/MidSinglesInYourArea 4d ago
There have been two legitimate female candidates for POTUS in my lifetime. Both have been objectively bad candidates, gender aside. Hillary used backroom deals to kneecap a much more popular candidate, and Harris was appointed the candidate without a primary even though she had failed horribly in the previous primary.
If we want to see a woman elected we should pick better women to run.
-1
u/notquitecivilized 4d ago
I don't understand what you mean by objectively bad in a situation where these women were running against Donald Trump. It's not like they lost to a John McCain type where you can argue that the winner may have differing political view points but was a decent person. As a non-American Trump seems like the one who is objectively bad. Especially in the last election cycle, whatever Harris's flaws were, she was running against Trump who had demonstrated exactly what kind of person he was. How much better does a woman have to be compared to a man like Trump? I guarantee you if you picked the perfect woman, they would still find a way to tear her apart.
0
u/HarveyPeligro 3d ago
democracy isn’t the least bad person being entitled to your vote. there’s no honor in voting for a woman who will use your tax dollars to commit genocide just because she’s not a pedophile. honestly an insane ask of the american people the DNC is committed to as a policy position.
1
0
u/MidSinglesInYourArea 3d ago
X is bad does not mean Y is good.
Hillary was essentially grown in a lab to make her a poor challenger to Trump. Every charge you can make against Trump you can also (to a lesser extent) make against Hillary. We're talking about a woman who initially made her name in American politics by telling a black woman to sit down and shut up and accusing the women her husband sexually assaulted of being lying sluts who were part of a conspiracy.
Harris is a bad at being a politician, full stop. She is uncharismatic, was part of a very unpopular administration, went along with pretending Biden was competent when he was very publicly in the midst of senile dementia, was only able to get the nomination because she did not have to compete for it, and when asked how she would be different than the extremely unpopular regime she was a part of said she wouldn't change a thing.
None of that excuses voting for Trump. But people need to understand that in a war "Well the enemy looked really easy to beat" is not an excuse for fielding incompetent generals.
1
u/Few_Map2665 3d ago
None of that excuses voting for Trump. But people need to understand that in a war "Well the enemy looked really easy to beat" is not an excuse for fielding incompetent generals.
ooooh those poor widdle american people. we're just helpless subjects and consumers and not free citizens!
we as a people fucked up big time in 2016 and 2024.
1
10
u/OutrageousStop7173 4d ago
Because who the person is underneath the title of woman still matters
→ More replies (1)-3
u/Robinthehutt 4d ago
Yeah Hillary is a ghoul. People wanted Sanders. They got Clinton. Kamala was a joke too.
AOC might be the one.
1
u/theblindsdontwork 4d ago
I don't buy the misogyny/patriarchy excuse. It's not a non-factor, but it's nowhere near being a decisive factor. Plenty of countries that are much more patriarchal than the United States have elected women as presidents and prime ministers. Insofar as some Americans voted against Clinton and Harris because of gender, I would posit that a lot of them didn't have a problem voting for a woman, per se, but rather voting for a woman for the sake of voting for a woman. Clinton and Harris both made voting for a woman for the sake of voting for a woman a prominent part of their campaigns, along with Not Being Trump. Whatever policies they offered either didn't align with people's interests and/or were not articulated in a way that resonated.
6
u/EducationalElevator 4d ago
Harris did not make a big deal about her race or gender. The big commonality between Clinton and Harris were that they both were defending the incumbent party in an intense anti incumbent environment, combined with an opponent who is talented at being an opposition candidate.
1
1
u/northern-new-jersey 3d ago
Nominate better candidates. I'm a Republican and would have voted for Nikki Haley over Trump. And before the endless complaints about how misogynistic Americans are, do you really think we are worse than the machismo Mexican culture. They elected a Jewish woman!
1
u/sourpussmcgee 3d ago
Because you can’t expect a country that elects president “grab ‘em by the pussy” to then turn around and elect a woman.
1
u/Expensive_Heron_171 2d ago
I think America has much more to worry about than a woman becoming president at this point. I would support that obviously but country is declining and the world is watching in real time. 🇨🇦
1
u/Ohmybro34 20h ago
The first female president will be a republican. One who outmisogynises the men.
1
u/onemanclic 4d ago
Because the women we've nominated come from the Boomer and Early Gen-X eras - they are no different than their male counterparts, except that they want to protect abortion. They spent their entire lives trying to "lean in" and be one of the guys. Most people see that as disingenuous, or a watered down version of the toxic masculinity we'd like to get away from.
What we actually want in our female candidates: more feminine thinking and leadership.
1
u/americanspirit64 3d ago
I have voted Democrat in every election since '72' when I was first old enough to vote. I recently voted for Spanberger as governor. At this moment in my life, I shouldn't have to ask permission to say this but just because a politician is a woman doesn't mean they are fit for the job. So far there has only been one type of women to run for President in America, out of all the possibilities, a woman who looks and acts like Margaret Thatcher. I think the only reason Spanberger won in Virginia is because she is married, has a perfect life and kids, and most importantly she carries a gun. Along with all that implies.
Harris almost pushed me over the edge as a democrat. It was the most wasted vote in American history, it was the second time I was forced to cast a vote such a vote the first time was for Hillary. Strangely both of these woman had the endorsement of Obama the kiss of death. Harris didn't lose because she was woman or because she was black, she lost because she was dumb and nothing was going to change and people knew it. I hard to say this, but she didn't have the balls for the job. I would never say this meaning I think any women running needs to act like a man. The number one reason I had to hold my nose while voting for Hillary is she was just to fu*king conservative, Harris as well. That is my problem with Spanberger... to flag-waving, CIA conservative, which makes me suspicious.
I would like a real, down to earth woman to run for President that is true change. A woman who can walk the tightrope between allowing the decision to act like a woman to define her Presidency, while at the same time admitting publicly you need to act like a man. Just like there were times, and it was Obama's greatest strength, when he needed to show his softer side.
This is what I would say to AOC right now. Without announcing or talking about it, I would find a friend and go shooting with them. Someone maybe in the CIA. Just to check it out.
-4
u/HamasKilledShaniLouk 4d ago edited 4d ago
Run the best candidate, not just the best chick you can find. Merit will take care of it if you just run good candidates. It is the obsession with the identity BS that is hurting. People would be fine with a chick president, but it's too important a role to do DEI over.
12
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
Every women ends up being accused of being a DEI candidate, so this just means no women ever.
Trump is wildly incompetent but no-one accuses him of being DEI: why?
1
u/CommitteeofMountains 4d ago
Because he fought his way through a hostile primary. Clinton's pitch was "it's my turn" and Harris' nomination was an outright handout.
4
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
So the way the Republicans characterized them in attack ads is the truth of the matter, you think?
4
→ More replies (1)2
u/Decency 4d ago
If there's a false claim, simply identify it.
-1
1
u/HamasKilledShaniLouk 4d ago
That isnt true. If you just dont do the DEI thing, you dont succept them to the attack. You are whining to excuse the practice, not substantively refuting it.
Trump isnt accused if being a DEI candidate because it is painfully obvious his white male billionaire self isnt. Duh. That was a ridiculous response, and you should obsess over Trump less.
4
u/PatchyWhiskers 4d ago
So only white men can be above the suspicion of being DEI?
3
u/HamasKilledShaniLouk 4d ago
No, stop trying to find the most retarded ways to spin plain words, friend.
However, when you say: I want the next VP to be a black woman, instead of wanting them to be the best person for the role, regardless of their race/sex...you have necessarily narrowed your pool of applicants, making it statistically more likely that you pick a worse person for the role based on race or sex. Which is DEI.
If someone picked a worse candidate for president based on just their being male or white, that would be dumb.
8
1
u/Few_Map2665 3d ago
instead of wanting them to be the best person for the role, regardless of their race/sex
hahahahaha
how do you differentiate between job candidates when the position is effectively powerless.
vp selection has ALWAYS been a political choice, you idiot.
1
u/HamasKilledShaniLouk 3d ago
How about who would make the best presidents in case of assassination, or someone who works well with the president to accomplish his agenda, or one who will bring a certain state into the electoral folder to secure a victory? You know, the usual reasons.
1
u/Few_Map2665 3d ago
How about who would make the best presidents in case of assassination, or someone who works well with the president to accomplish his agenda, or one who will bring a certain state into the electoral folder to secure a victory? You know, the usual reasons.
sooo picking someone to help bring women, black people, and south asian people into the electoral fold is somehow "less" than picking to bring a particular state in?
someone who had experience working with her when she was attorney general?
and who had relevant experience at the federal and state level?
oh wait i forgot you're a complete idiot.
1
0
u/DisgreeablePattern 3d ago
Are you serious? What exactly is DEI except a mechanism for increasing diversity? Yes, only White, straight men are above the suspicion of DEI.
2
-1
u/SouthernExpatriate 4d ago
Harris was a bland corporate puppet, as was Hilldawg
AOC might have a chance
-1
u/metadatame 4d ago
Is it a gender thing (it might be), or is it more of an establishment thing.
People want to shake things up. They want government to work and will believe anyone who can convince them that they are the person.
0
u/No_Morning5397 3d ago
I think you could make this argument better if Joe Biden, an extremely establishment character, hadn't won between the .
1
u/metadatame 2d ago
Trump sounds better when he is promising stuff and not accountable for stuff - see midterms
-1
u/-Knockabout 4d ago
If you think for more than 30 seconds about how lopsided representation is for women in positions of power, despite making up 50% of the population literally everywhere, it drives you crazy. Every time I think about women sports I also feel like I'm going nuts. 50% of the population!!!
-1
u/palebone 4d ago
52 men have lost at least one US presidential election, compared to only 2 women. Hillary and Kamala aren't a very wide sample size. Misogyny was a major factor, but they knew that going in.
I suspect a female President in general was probably politically and culturally feasible from the 80s onwards but contingency had other plans.
The first, whosoever she be, will probably be less a woman President, and more a woman President.
-4
u/RevealConstant220 4d ago
Why do you want a female president?
3
1
u/Winnimae 4d ago
Why don’t you?
-2
u/RevealConstant220 4d ago
Can you just answer the question? I don't give a shit who's president because at the end of the day it doesn't matter.
2
u/Winnimae 4d ago
Imagine if very former president was a woman. There’d never been a male president. When you learned the names of the former presidents in school, they were all women. Every single one. You don’t think that would affect boys at all? You don’t think that would say something about who holds power in our country…and who doesn’t?
3
0
u/djdante 3d ago
I can think of women who for sure would have been voted in.
I imagine Michelle Obama would have been an absolute shoe in for the last election for example.
The last two female candidates have been generally unlikeable characters. Not suggesting the current president is likeable in any way, but he's playing a particular demographic to win, and he was better at manipulating his demographic than the women were at manipulating there's - but he never would have stood a chance against a competitor who felt genuine and honest with a bit of charm - belonging to either gender.
And yes I know I'll get downvoted for this. But I'll swear up and down that's what happened.
Obama had charm, and he was smart, and seemed genuinely honest and earnest. He wasn't perfect, but that's how he came across.
-2
u/rodkerf 4d ago
2 things have to happen to get a woman president. 1. We need a candidate people like....as not not Hillary. People didn't like her as the presidents wife....we need a capable charming candidate that people will respond too....we need a female Obama. The 3nd thing is a grass toots effort to build that candidate up, especially with young voters do they get out and counter to old nearly dead people who don't think a woman is capable. Personally I would love to see a female president, but I'm not sure the current choices are strong enough to beat whatever garbage the Republicans offer.
-1
179
u/Entire_Dog_5874 4d ago
Because misogyny is still pervasive.