Once Again Warren Campaign Faces Female Electability Issues

Published in Folha de S. Paulo
(Brazil) on 7 March 2020
by Paula Leite (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Linneu Salles. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.

 

 

 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren was once the leading candidate in the Democratic Party presidential primary race, but lost ground to Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.

The 2020 Democratic presidential primary race turned out to be the most diverse in history as six women entered the race as candidates. One stood out from the rest: Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who had led in the polls.

A few months and one Super Tuesday later, she gave up, and the race is now between two white men, each older than 70: Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders. All that is left now is to discuss how much being a woman hurt her campaign in a country that has not yet elected a female president.

Warren gained prominence in politics following the 2008 financial crisis. As a lawyer who specialized in personal finance and bankruptcy, she was one of the proponents of creating a financial consumer protection agency, a cause which gained importance following the millions of people who were harmed by ruthless bank loans in the United States.

During the Obama administration, she became the head of this new agency and was later elected senator of Massachusetts, having campaigned on a similar platform.*

Her experience provided grounds to establish herself as someone outside the political establishment, and someone who would protect the average American.

Some of her proposals were similar to those of the more radical Bernie Sanders, such as public health care and free higher education for all, however, but without taking the openly socialist position of the Vermont senator. This may explain some of the difficulty Warren had with her campaign—her platform was a bit too left-wing to attract the center of the Democratic Party, but at the same time, she was not disruptive enough to attract the more progressive members of the party, who preferred Sanders.

But Warren`s effort to reach the White House encountered women candidates’ oldest problem: electability. When thinking about who would face Republican Donald Trump on the debate stage, Democratic voters became wary, and believed that a man stood a better chance.

Warren spoke about the subject after her campaign. “If you say, 'Yeah, there was sexism in this race,’ everyone says, ‘whiner.’ If you say, ‘No, there was no sexism,’ about a bazillion women think, ‘what planet do you live on?’”

Like other female candidates, she tried to balance many traits women need in politics: they have to be tough, but not too much; feminine, but not too much; and smart, but not too much, in order to not scare anyone.

There were improvements in how Warren was treated, especially compared to how Hillary Clinton was treated in 2016. The media mentioned little about her clothes, her ankles or her husband, which is an improvement.

However, even female voters have doubts about the viability of a woman candidate for president. A CNN poll conducted in January revealed that 18% of female Democrats thought that a female candidate could not be elected, compared to 7% of male Democrats.

According to U.S. news reports, and later confirmed by Warren, Sanders also raised this concern in 2018, telling Warren during a meeting that he did not believe a woman could win the election. The senator denied the allegations, which led to friction between the two.

The pragmatic choice of Democratic men and women may result in a candidate with a higher chance of beating Trump, who in turn, certainly would have resorted to making every kind of sexist argument against Warren, as he did with Clinton.

But a self-fulfilling prophecy persists. Until a woman is elected, there will be doubts about whether a woman can be elected.


*Editor’s note: Although Elizabeth Warren proposed and established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, she did not serve as its first director. The first formal CFPB director was Richard Cordray.


SÃO PAULO

A corrida pela nomeação presidencial do Partido Democrata dos Estados Unidos se configurou no ano passado como a mais diversa já vista: seis mulheres se apresentaram como pré-candidatas. Uma se destacou no grupo: a senadora Elizabeth Warren, que aparecia na frente nas pesquisas.

Alguns meses e uma Super Terça depois, ela desistiu, e a disputa agora se dará entre dois homens brancos de mais de 70 anos: Joe Biden e Bernie Sanders. Resta agora discutir o quanto o fato de ela ser mulher prejudicou sua campanha, em um país que ainda não elegeu uma presidenta.

Warren ganhou no cenário político depois da crise financeira de 2008. Advogada especializada na área de finanças pessoais e falências, ela era uma das defensoras da criação de uma agência de proteção ao consumidor financeiro, causa que ganhou urgência depois que milhões foram lesados por empréstimos inescrupulosos no país.

No governo Obama, ela se tornou czar dessa recém-criada agência, e depois se elegeu senadora por Massachusetts com plataforma similar.

Essa atuação a credenciou a se posicionar como alguém fora do establishment, que defende as pessoas comuns.

Algumas de suas propostas se assemelhavam às do mais radical Bernie Sanders, como saúde pública e universidade grátis para todos, mas sem o socialismo declarado do senador pelo estado de Vermont.

Parte da dificuldade da campanha de Warren pode ser explicado por isso: sua plataforma estava um pouco à esquerda demais para atrair o “centrão” do Partido Democrata a ela, mas também não era disruptiva o suficiente para os grupos mais progressistas, que preferiram Sanders.

Mas a tentativa de Warren de chegar à Casa Branca esbarrou também no mais antigo dos problemas que as candidatas mulheres enfrentam: a elegibilidade. Na hora de imaginar quem enfrentaria o republicano Donald Trump no pleito geral, bateu a dúvida no eleitor democrata, que acabou achando que um homem era mais garantido.

A própria senadora já havia abordado o assunto em campanha: “Se você falar: ‘existe sexismo na campanha’, todos dizem: ‘chorona!’. Se você disser ‘Não, não existe sexismo’, um quaquilhão de mulheres vai pensar: ‘em que planeta você vive?’,” disse Warren.

Como outras candidatas, ela tentou se equilibrar na estreita trave reservada a políticas mulheres: precisam ser duronas, mas não demais, femininas, mas não demais, inteligentes, mas não demais, para não assustar ninguém.

Houve avanços em relação ao tratamento dispensado a ela, se comparado ao que aconteceu a Hillary Clinton em 2016. Pouco se falou na mídia sobre suas roupas, sobre suas canelas ou sobre seu marido, o que é um avanço.

Mas as próprias eleitoras têm dúvidas sobre a viabilidade de uma candidata à Casa Branca: uma pesquisa da CNN em janeiro mostrou que 18% das democratas achavam que uma mulher não conseguiria se eleger, ante 7% dos homens democratas.

Sanders também levantou essa lebre em 2018, dizendo a Warren em uma reunião que não acreditava que uma mulher pudesse ganhar a eleição, segundo relatos publicados pela mídia americana e depois confirmados por ela. O senador nega que tenha dito isso, o que levou a um racha entre os dois.

A opção pragmática do eleitor e da eleitora democrata pode resultar em um candidato com mais chances de derrotar Trump, que certamente não se furtaria a usar todo tipo de argumento sexista contra ela, como fez com Hillary Clinton.

Mas perpetua-se mais uma vez a profecia autorrealizável: enquanto uma mulher não for eleita, haverá dúvidas sobre se uma mulher pode ser eleita, e assim seguem o ovo e a galinha.

This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Topics

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?

Ukraine: Trump Faces Uneasy Choices on Russia’s War as His ‘Compromise Strategy’ Is Failing

Related Articles

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?