I want to believe we could have a woman president so long as she ran on something other than being a wet noodle that's trying to be #relatable more than just being a good candidate.

Or better yet, running on something more than

"Are you really gonna let Trump win?"

Anyone suggesting that the US is too sexist to elect a woman president has to explain the election of Claudia Sheinbaum.

By every metric I can find, Mexico is more misogynistic than the US. You can look at crime statistics on domestic violence, rape, murder; or opinion surveys showing men's negative attitude toward women -- all the stats coming out of Mexico are worse.

Yet somehow, Mexico overwhelmingly elected a woman (a Jewish woman in an 85% Christian population, too).

My hypothesis is that policy matters much more than the gender of a candidate. Kamala had absolutely pathetic policy proposals, supporting the status quo of corporate economic domination and a foreign policy soaked in innocent blood. but maybe I'm biased.

Doesn't help that the "women candidate" the DNC spit out are neoliberal status quo protectors, their "female candidates" is at best performative from them.

She's right.
We would have elected one by now if that was the case OHWAITWEDID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election

I'm so fucking sick of this argument. It's nothing more than centrist cope; a way of willfully misunderstanding the reason for Hillary Clinton's and Kamala Harris' campaign failures.

Regression.

I feel like 10+ years ago the USA would have been more ready (maybe still not fully, idk).

No it’s not America isn’t ready for a woman president. It’s not ready to have the DNC keep nominating candidates that lack any appeal or enthusiasm.

Let me preface this rant with I voted for both Hillary and Kamala.

Hillary was a terrible candidate because she is neither conservative or liberal/progressive. The DNC railroaded Bernie because it was Hillary’s “turn”.

And with Kamala instead of have an actual primary and getting the best candidate, they just shoe horned her in at the last possible minute and expected everyone to just be ok with it. Not to mention she falls into the same category as Hillary who is neither conservative or progressive so equally disliked on both sides.

I think the problem ultimately lies within the democrats themselves unwilling to listen to the younger voters who are in dire need of hope and change not the status quo that really isn’t working for them or anybody really. It also doesn’t help that neither party really gives two shits about pissing off the liberal base and it shows.

She's right.

I thought we were ready for a Black president, and maybe some of the country was. Where I was living at the time, a white man was okay working side by side with a Black man. He'd call him brother, they'd eat at each other's places, their wives would hang out, their kids would play together... I thought racism was mostly a memory. People were even fine with a Black boss. But when it came to a Black president, they just couldn't cope.

If these people can't see past skin colour, they definitely won't see past gender. For these people, the First Gentleman would be the "real" president. They would not respect her and, at most, would say she's just the spokesman for the real president. A lot of people liked Michelle Obama, but not because she's Michelle Obama, but because she's Mrs Barack Obama. They don't care what she thinks or knows, they just expect that she's speaking for him. And, I think, in 8 years, we saw that she was her own person, but a lot of people couldn't see it.

I wonder if she's interested in running. I think Michelle Obama would poll better than Kamala Harris. I have a feeling she's done with politics, though, if she were ever really interested.

Shut the fuck up Michelle, go to the dustbin of history with your husband and never show your face in public ever again please. You fucking know why Hillary and Harris lost and it was not because they were women.

The country is not ready for a president with intelligence, integrity, morals, empathy or even a bit of humanity.

Perhaps it's because the Democrat party keeps trying to force a woman candidate instead of letting it happen naturally. Voters wanted Bernie Sanders, instead the party made Hilary Clinton the nominee. Then they didn't even have a proper primary in 2024. Biden won the primary because he was the incumbent and nobody really tried to run against him. Then he dropped out, it was too late for a primary, and Harris was just appointed as his replacement.

She's perpetrating the bullshit that it's about race or gender. If that woman is continuing the exact same policies that old white men orchestrating she will lose. The public by and large is saying we are tired of old white rich men dictating our lives telling us that we are not struggling telling us that everything is fine when we can see in our day-to-day lives that is not true. People did not support Biden because people saw that Biden was a continuation of the same policies that gave us Trump the first time. And then Harris said that she would not have changed a single thing that occurred under Biden. She was a continuation of old white male policies. And any other woman that runs in the future on that same platform will lose regardless of gender regardless of race. Anyone mentioning race or gender is weaponizing race and gender as a political tool

Disclaimer: My comment which follows does not apply to fans and supporters of a candidate. It applies to a difference in how male and female candidates are referred to in the media.

When our society reaches the stage where TV pundits, political blog writers, etc. stop referring to women candidates by just their first name (almost every time) in the same context that they continue referring to men candidates using their last name, or title + last name, then maybe I'll believe the US is ready to elect a woman president.

(edit: I should add to that list, also when even the opposing side will use her last name same as they do with male candidates that they are against, meaning that they may hate her but still have at least that much respect for her as a candidate)

Probably because the US is such a religious conservative country. Christianity (especially evangelical and more conservative type), patriarchy and authoritarianism go together, and that's who the great majority of his voters were.

Considering trump won twice against women but lost when he ran against a man, it seems the majority of voters would rather elect any man than any woman, even if that man is seriously flawed on every imaginable level. Only when both candidates were men were factors other than gender given more weight.

It's pretty telling how easily liberals give up on their supposed ambitions even when the effort was obviously flawed.

Sad indeed. The rest of the world does mostly okay by their elected woman leaders. So...no metric system and no women leaders. Got it. I just hope to all that is holy that the country is not ready for a pedophiliac leader.