Democratic presidential candidate and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren has a lot of great ideas she would like to implement as president! But she’s also a woman! AARRRGGGG between these two factors, it’s a tough decision for voters to make, a sigh-inducing piece today from the New York Times reported.
Yes, some voters are worried Warren is too progressive, or too smart, or can never recover from the whole Native American heritage snafu. However, others are looking at Hillary Clinton, then looking back at Warren, and are like, NOPE. From the Times (emphasis mine throughout):
And there are Democrats who, chastened by Hillary Clinton’s defeat in 2016, believe that a woman cannot win in 2020.
“I think she’s terrific but my questions about her are, can she get elected with the negativity, with all the stuff that’s thrown at her?” asked Rick Morris, a New Hampshire carpenter who attended a house party for Ms. Warren there last month. “Usually in the primary I vote for whoever I like the most, but this one I will put in electability.”
Gail Houghton, a retiree, said flatly that she did not think Ms. Warren could win the presidency because of her gender.
“They’re just not ready yet,” Ms. Houghton said of the American electorate, adding that Mr. Trump’s divisive conduct has normalized prejudices. “It’s getting worse because we’re getting permission to behave this way from the top.”
But, Ms. Houghton was quick to add, she believed Ms. Warren would “make a wonderful vice president.”
So Warren is “terrific” and would be “wonderful” as a runner-up, but her gender is still a liability when a second Trump term is at stake? Curious.
Well, the sexism can’t be that strong with voters, can it? I mean, I bet this “electability” argument has also been employed against candidates lacking experience or whose employment history might completely alienate the progressive arm of the party too, right? From the Times again:
“If it were completely up to me, I’d vote for her,” said Jessie Sagona, who also came to see Ms. Warren last month in New Hampshire. “But I kind of feel like, do we need somebody in the middle like Kamala or Pete,” referring to Ms. Harris and Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Ms. Sagona said she had not fully made up her mind but was weighing the importance of “thinking strategically.”
At a Democratic picnic outside Des Moines a few weeks earlier, Marnie Lloyd said of Ms. Harris, “I don’t think we’ll hear the ‘she’s not likable’ we heard with Hillary.” Ms. Lloyd said she was less confident about Ms. Warren avoiding such a critique.
Strange! I thought whoever someone votes for is up to them! So if “electability” is key, their pick must be someone who has the system-shaking politics and vivaciousness to beat President Donald Trump. Surely their top pick can’t be...
Many moderate Democrats see the field’s current front-runner, Joseph R. Biden Jr., the 76-year-old former vice president, as a safer option than Ms. Warren and other candidates.
Many voters interviewed are now wrestling with whether to elevate a candidate who captures their imaginations, and progressive ambitions, or to rally more cautiously behind a Democrat who they perceive as having a better chance of building a broad coalition of Democrats, independents and disaffected Republicans to fulfill their most urgent goal: ejecting Mr. Trump from the White House.
There’s no way that Biden can still be viewed as the “cautious” pick, given he can’t even get his talking points straight. You think putting Biden on a debate stage with Trump, no matter how offensive or incorrect his comments are, is safe? And yet Warren has an “electability” problem? Give me a fucking break!!!