Call Me “Madame President”: Female Electability in the 2020 Presidential Race
“Is our country ready for a female president?” Although this question has been asked repeatedly for years in many political circles, it has gained traction since the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Hillary Clinton’s defeat has since caused many people to worry if there will ever come a time when voters will elect a woman to the highest office in the country. Should they do so, there is also concern surrounding a woman’s capabilities to execute the presidential duties adequately. However, is there any weight to these worries? While the 2016 election might not have ended well for Clinton for reasons ranging from inherent gender bias to controversy surrounding her past affiliations with politics, we cannot view her loss as a death sentence for female candidates to come. In fact, just two years later, women would be so successful during the midterm election season that 2018 would be dubbed “The Year of the Woman.” It was women who won seat after seat in the House and Senate, and claimed several governorships. 102 women were elected in the House, 14 in the senate, and 9 in gubernatorial races. 2018 was also a banner year for women democrats and women of color. We saw people such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley become political superstars, both in terms of how they upset the balance maintained by long term incumbents and in how effectively they were able to garner support by mobilizing constituents to volunteer for their campaigns.
Although many voters think it is less likely that a woman will be victorious in an election which holds the highest of stakes, this is more of a dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy than a legitimate cause for concern. If voters allow themselves to be influenced by the idea that every woman who vies for the presidency is guaranteed to fail for no reason other than the well worn “that’s just the world we live in” mindset, all female presidential candidates will be doomed before they are truly able to get their campaigns off the ground. Gender bias is still a very real issue in our society, which forces us to distinctly question if a woman can potentially win (yes) and if a woman will win (debatable). By and large though, the United States is ready for a female president. The question is: who will claim the position?
Currently campaigning for the presidency in 2020 are 5 women: Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI 2nd District), Kamala Harris (Sen. D-CA), Amy Klobuchar (Sen. D-MN), Elizabeth Warren (Sen. D-MA), and Marianne Williamson. Among all Democrats, there is an undeniable overlap between the candidates’ stances on key issues. In terms of income inequality, for instance, Warren and Harris both aim to close the wide gap between people of different socioeconomic classes, yet choose to go about it differently. While Warren argues that raising taxes for the wealthy and creating more social programs for underprivileged people is the right course of action, Harris hopes to improve tax benefits for middle-class and low- income Americans. All five candidates, however, agree that the high price of college and the debt students accumulate need to be remedied; they lobby to eliminate tuition in public colleges and universities or, in Harris’ case, to make college debt-free.
Another hot topic of debate this election season is health care- specifically, universal health care. In the past few years, Senator Bernie Sanders has spearheaded the movement to implement Medicare for All. Since gaining traction, other democrats have divided themselves on different sides of the issue. Warren is fully in favor of universal healthcare, and adheres to Sanders’ plan of providing full coverage for every procedure at no charge to patients. Of the five female candidates, she is alone in her complete agreement with Sanders. Williamson and Gabbard also support Medicare for All, but view the more moderate approach, Medicare for Some, as a viable option as well. With this plan, they would create a government-run system to compete with private insurance companies, increase the availability of Medicaid, and pass legislation in support of the Affordable Care Act. Klobuchar and Harris oppose Medicare for All in favor of the cheaper and less disruptive expansion of coverage options to include a government plan available for everyone, in addition to the already existing private insurance plans.
On the minds of many is the deteriorating status of our environment and the lack of action taken by the current administration to improve matters. Ideas for change vary in terms of development and aggression, but are all a necessary step in the right direction. Williamson and Gabbard support shutting down existing nuclear power reactors in order to limit radioactive waste which would be harmful if spread through the air and water. Klobuchar, on the other hand, supports nuclear power because it is stronger and more reliable than renewable energy sources. She also hopes to put an end to federal oil and gas leases and offshore drilling. Warren and Harris support a nationwide ban on fracking federally and privately, and while both hope to work to improve the U.S’s carbon footprint, Harris is alone amongst the five women in her intention to tax carbon emissions.
Such pronounced differentiation in policy is not present in relation to immigration. Democrats’ belief that an improvement in this legislation is necessary has been strengthened in recent years by President Trump’s continuous efforts to marginalize and expel multiple groups of people from the United States. One of his most infamous and ambitious goals for his time in office has become a symbol of his presidency: The Wall. His promise and subsequent efforts to erect a wall on the U.S/Mexico border are representative of his greater intolerance towards immigrants and lenient immigration policy. However, the vast majority of this crop of democratic candidates, men and women alike, support programs and policies such as DACA, which aims to provide an avenue to citizenship for those brought to the U.S as children. Warren, Harris, and Williamson also aim to repeal the “Illegal Entry” statute which they argue criminalizes and allows their severe treatment of people who attempt to cross the border. Overall, it seems that each of these female candidates hopes to implement some sort of legislation to better the treatment and integration of immigrants into our society.
So, of the five, who (if any) will win the democratic nomination and go head to head against President Trump? It is hard to say. Where we are right now in the election process is not necessarily where we will be in November of 2020, but Warren and Harris have certainly attracted the most attention among the female candidates recently. In fact, both boast undefeated victories for every election in which they have even run. Clearly this trend will come to an end for at least one of them; for this stage of the election cycle, though, it certainly provides a number of interesting possible outcomes for voters to consider.
“Here's How Many Women Have Won or Lost Elections in 2018.” The Women Candidate Tracker. Politico, November 28, 2018. https://www.politico.com/interactives/2018/women-rule-candidate-tracker/.
“Electability Becomes a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.” Opinions. The Washington Post, September 19, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com › opinions › 2019/09/19 › electability-becomes-a-self-fulfilling-prohpecy/.
Politico Staff. “Where Kamala Harris Stands on the Biggest 2020 Issues.” 2020 Democrats. Politico, October 23, 2019. https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/kamala-harris/.
Politico Staff. “Where Elizabeth Warren Stands on the Biggest 2020 Issues.” 2020 Democrats. Politico, October 30, 2019. https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/elizabeth-warren/.
Politico Staff. “Where Tulsi Gabbard Stands on the Biggest 2020 Issues.” 2020 Democrats. Politico, October 23, 2019. https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/tulsi-gabbard/.