Posted on 11/04/2024 8:38:52 AM PST by simpson96
When Anita Lawrence watched Hillary Clinton lose the 2016 election, she thought to herself, “well, there goes my opportunity to see a woman in the presidency.”
Maybe the U.S. was unable or unwilling to view a woman as capable of serving as president, she thought.
“Women have always had to work harder, longer and smarter than their cohorts for less pay. And I think it’s just part of our culture in this country that men, and even women, cannot see a woman as a leader of this nation,” Lawrence said.
Then 65, Lawrence wasn’t sure if a major political party would nominate a woman again in her lifetime.
But that opportunity came sooner than expected.
Women over 70 have lived through innumerable revolutionary changes in gender equality in their lifetimes, including the rise and fall of the constitutional right to an abortion, the ability to have their own credit cards, the implementation of Title IX, the election of lawmakers who look like them. With Vice President Kamala Harris now topping the Democratic ticket, they have a chance to see if this history-making run has a different ending from 2016 – and they may even play a role in that outcome.
Ahead of the election, PBS News spoke to 13 women, ranging in age from 71 to 97, about their lives, the race and seeing another woman atop a major party ticket.
“Once we get a woman president, I don’t think it’ll be as different,” Hilary Lane, 73, said. “It’ll be more normalized.”
(snip)
Some who shared their stories are still bitter over Clinton’s loss. One is committed to voting for Trump for the third time. Many are enthusiastic about Harris and her qualifications.
Patricia Laarman is “thrilled” that Harris is running, and believes she’s qualified for the position based on her history as attorney general of California and as vice president.
“You know, I am 90 years old and I have voted in 16 presidential elections, and [2016] was the height of it. I mean, it was just so impressive,” Laarman said. She said it was “very important” to her to see a woman elected president.
Similarly, Laurie Willard was excited that Democrats, the party she said she’s almost always voted for, nominated Clinton.
“One of the reasons I was disappointed [after Clinton lost] was because I am 78 and I was thinking I’d really like to have a woman president in my lifetime,” said Willard, who lives in Anoka, Minnesota. “I am very excited about Kamala,” she added.
In ‘92, the “year of the woman” in Congress, they said the chicks would end the culture of corruption. Instead, we got pelosi, mikulski, waters, lofgren and all the other nouveau riche congressional pols, whose corruption dwarfs anything we’ve seen.
Don’t worry ladies, Obama can come out of the closet and self identify as female. That should make you happy and define “her/she” as the first black female President.
They don’t realize but by their statements and actions they are presenting a case as to why women shouldn’t have the vote!
They had a gay president. Wasn’t that enough?
Do the women know that Harris supports biological males playing against females in women’s sports?
That esplanes everything
Ricky Ricardo
Idiocy, yes, but so is voting for a communist/globalist because she’s female.
The phrase is a compound noun, and "female" in this context is an adjective, so the syntactically correct phraseology is "woman president" (numbskulls!).
Before the demoncrats started trying to confuse us as to the nature of sex and the number of sexes (which has nothing to do with gender), your copy editor would have rapped you sharply across the knuckles with his ruler for making such a m egregious mistake.
What liberal 'elites' fail to understand about why we haven't elected a woman yet...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.