Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should Democrats Avoid Female Candidates? (Barf Alert!!!)
Townhall.com ^ | May 10, 2019 | Mona Charen

Posted on 05/10/2019 4:06:21 AM PDT by Kaslin

Many Democratic voters are worried that a female candidate cannot win the presidency in 2020. "I don't think they're strong enough to carry it for themselves," an Iowa voter told The Washington Post. Amber Phillips reports that "female politicians are held by voters to a much higher standard than men," and points to polls showing that today's support for Elizabeth Warren (12 percent) and Kamala Harris (8 percent) drops to low single digits when voters are asked who is likely to defeat President Donald Trump.

Without denying that some people may harbor misogynistic feelings, and that many Democrats may indeed fear, as Phillips reported, that while they personally would happily vote for a woman for president, their neighbors might not, this doesn't prove that women are held to a higher standard. The evidence is mixed. It's never possible to know with certainty what motivates voters. Could Mitt Romney's religion have decided the 2012 race? It's possible.

Is there an anti-woman bias? Election analyst Karlyn Bowman has found that women are just as likely to be successful in political races as men. And most voters are past the identity politics phase of wanting to vote for a candidate (or oppose one) due to sex.

At the level of presidential politics, the data set is a bit skimpy -- one election. Many Democrats seem to believe that Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss can be chalked up to sex, or, in the words of New York Times op-ed writer Farhad Manjoo, the perception that "American society is wracked at every level by a pervasive and enduring misogyny."

Or perhaps Clinton became unpopular for reasons all her own. It isn't as if she was always unpopular. Twice in her career, Clinton was regarded favorably by a whopping 66 percent of Americans -- in December 1998, when the Monica Lewinsky scandal made her the most prominent wronged wife on the planet, and in November 2009, while she served as secretary of state. Even in the midst of the Benghazi hearings in December 2012, her approval still held steady at 65 percent.

In 2015, Clinton's approval dipped sharply, down to 49 percent. This drop tracked among all voters, including Democrats, whose support declined from 86 percent to 77 percent. What happened? Clinton didn't change her sex. She ran into the private email server scandal, and it damaged her not just because of the underlying offense, but also due to her persistent deceit, and the fact that this revived concerns about her dishonesty and "rules don't apply to me" image from earlier in her career.

The share of voters who are women has been increasing steadily since 1980. The Center for American Women in Politics at Rutgers shows that in 2016, 63.3 percent of eligible women voted compared with only 59.3 percent of eligible men. It's possible that women harbor self-hating feelings toward female candidates, but that seems unlikely. The data does show clearly that women, especially the unmarried ones, tend to prefer more liberal candidates without regard to sex. And there is one study showing that when Democratic women run against Republican men, some Republican female voters defect to the woman.

What about male voters? Are they the ones who hold retrograde views, thinking female candidates are too emotional or weak to do the job? There may be some of that, but think of Republican voters in 2008. They were lukewarm toward John McCain, the last man standing at the end of the primaries, but they were over the moon for Sarah Palin. A September 2008 CNN poll found that 62 percent of men approved of Palin compared with only 53 percent of women. Asked whether Palin was qualified to be president, 57 percent of male respondents said yes, 14 points higher than among women. In fact, 55 percent of women thought she wasn't qualified.

You can mine the data in the belief that voters are not "ready" for a woman president. But the truth is probably closer to this: The right woman candidate hasn't run yet. Qualifications aside (it's so pre-2016 to fret about qualifications!), if Oprah Winfrey or Michelle Obama jumped into the race, they'd rocket to the top. Great Britain, Israel, Germany and India, for heaven's sake, have elected female leaders. Is the U.S. more misogynist than those countries?

Not everything reduces to bias. May the best person win.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: women

1 posted on 05/10/2019 4:06:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Old white establishment male is leading in the poles, funny


2 posted on 05/10/2019 4:15:05 AM PDT by ronnie raygun (nicdip.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
If they were more concerned what's between the candidates ears than between their legs, they would have a better shot.

3 posted on 05/10/2019 4:18:04 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (I'd rather have Unequal Wealth than Equal Poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Any party that nominates a woman for President will likely have difficulties when it becomes apparent that she has the personality of a water moccasin.

This difficulty will manifest in every segment of the population.

4 posted on 05/10/2019 4:24:14 AM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitWielder1
Well put. The real problem is, there are very few brains to pass around in today's Democrat Party.

As far as women as leaders go, that woman has to be truly exceptional and so far they have located one. Somebody of the Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, Jean Kilpatrick, or Michelle Malkin variety would be great - but Hillary or Kamela and the rest of the herd are non-starters.

5 posted on 05/10/2019 4:31:11 AM PDT by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Should Dems avoid a woman candidate for President?

The ones they’ve proposes so far... yes.


6 posted on 05/10/2019 4:41:53 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine ( "It's always a party when you're eating the seed corn.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
And most voters are past the identity politics phase of wanting to vote for a candidate (or oppose one) due to sex.

Sure could have fooled me. I thought the only reason to vote for Hillary was that she has lady parts. And the left would have us believe that being female automatically makes one more qualified than any man on the ballot, regardless of actual experience and qualifications. This is why the left has yet to actually put an intelligent woman on any ballot.

7 posted on 05/10/2019 4:42:06 AM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

How well did sexual identity politics work out for Hillary Clinton? How well are they working out for Camela, Running Mouth Warren, and Butt-gig?

Maybe the libs should try focusing on quality candidates instead of ticking PC boxes.


8 posted on 05/10/2019 5:27:50 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

One of the things that makes me shake my head about the DemonRats is the fact there are many women out there perfectly capable of running for office and successfully executing the duties of their office. After all, the DemonRats try to portray themselves as the party that supports women. Of course it is kind of comical all the women who are competent and qualified just happen to be Conservative :0)


9 posted on 05/10/2019 5:42:34 AM PDT by MissEdie (I am South Carolina Strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I think the Democrats should avoid all 57 genders.


10 posted on 05/10/2019 6:53:09 AM PDT by rjsimmon (The Tree of Liberty Thirsts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Hillary was strong. Fewer showers will do just that.


11 posted on 05/10/2019 8:36:27 AM PDT by Libloather (Global warming is AWESOME!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Hillary was strong.

To paraphrase Yoda, the Stench is strong in this one.k

12 posted on 05/10/2019 6:35:30 PM PDT by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Gone but not forgiven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson