YOu keep mentioning the ages of Sanders and Biden but isn't Warren of similar age? So your point is?
4
I voted for Warren and when offered a choice in my Texas Democratic ballot, I voted for female over male candidates. I will continue to do so. I agree with Silver in that we have the power to change things and until we stop voting for white dudes, change ain't gonna happen.
18
Oh please do not bring the gender card here: Warren's lost is more her own fault than anything else. She became so unlikable when she started attacking her follow dem. candidates so hard and personally: a lot of people were turn off by that time.
And her strange ideas like to get 50% of women into her cabinet...
If we keep this kind political correctness, blame her personal misbehavior to gender discrimination, democrat will never win the presidency !
7
New Zealand has a female PM.
Angela Merkel, Margaret Thatcher, Theresa May, Indira Ghandi,
Katrin Jacobsdottir, Golda Meir, just a few.
There’s something rotten in the states of America
25
Looks as if the only people who are not fazed by ignoring the "most diverse Presidential field ever are the millions of -- you know -- actual Democratic voters. And this time around, no one can say "big money" defeated "diversity" since one old white guy, Bernie Sanders, is religiously sticking to $18 average donations, and the resurgent Biden has surged in historic proportions without having had two nickels to rub together. Maybe this means that self-appointed elites, like Times contributors, should ask themselves some hard questions.
7
Everything is about diversity, D, D, D...!
Half of the population is female. If the female candidates could not get their support, then please don't complain anymore...!
It is QUALITY, no matter how you define it, that counts....
2
Elizabeth Warren was my candidate. I will be a 70 year old white male this month, but I have always tried to keep my eyes open and think for myself. As an overqualified lab tech 45 years ago, I felt I understood everything about my job. I was pleased to meet a new female colleague who was still wet behind her ears but quickly demonstrated, she knew more about our job than I could imagine. As I gained my engineering degree and progressed through my career, I met remarkable people, not a few pioneering women. We ignore our pioneers at our peril.
9
This is such a sad day for us ladies. Though not perfect, she was a great candidate in many ways. And the truth is that if she were a man she would have received a lot more votes.
And maybe the saddest part is that it is we women who are to blame. Over and over again we listen to the men - the powerful, the media - and believe them when they tell us that we can't win. We are unsure of our own convictions because of the brain washing that we've endured, both overtly and more subtly. This is confirmed by the polls that show overwhelmingly we'd vote for a woman IF we believed they could make it.
Until we start to have more confidence in ourselves we can hardly blame the men for women not doing well. Even if, as I believe, they are consistently wrong in their belief that we can't win.
It is time to get more yin/yang balance in our country and in the world. We'd all be better off with less testosterone permeating our world.
13
I would love to see female president in my lifetime,(am 54)I hoped it will be her.
It's so sad her campaign crumbled.
"Any female" is insult for female.I would be happy if it's her.but I will wait until another great female candidate will appear.
1
I have no idea how to face my 7-yr-old daughter tonight who keeps asking if Warren won. She watched me caucus for Warren in Iowa, and is highly curious why we don't have many female leaders in our country. Does not help that she knows about female political leaders from my birth country, including her great-grandmother who was an activist herself. I am personally devastated that after all the woman's marches and pink hats and what not, the "liberal" party comes up with two bitter bickering old white men, both of whom have personally mansplained to Warren at different times in her career.
92
@Woman Perhaps a good, intelligent candidate lost because of something so superficial as "image"? Who told Ms Warren to campaign in a cardigan?
6
@Woman — you might explain to your daughter that gender is just one element of many in determining who to vote for. Sotto voce, we might add, entre adults: Warren was headed for disaster vs Trump, as was fellow Harvard professor Dukakis vs. a Bush. Academics don’t sell in the retail politics market. Adult choices are more complex than the simplified version you ate presenting.
9
I'm a woman and a feminist. In fact, I would consider myself a feminist before anything else political. But, I didn't support Warren. Because I believe she has more power and importance in the Senate and I don't want to risk losing her seat to a Republican. Of equal importance, I don't believe most/all of her policy agenda can actually pass Congress. Presidents are not kings. They cannot rule by fiat. Sanders has the same problem. It's uncool, but incrementalism is more effective unless you are FDR.
6
She was by far the best of the bunch
and I am devastated she did not win.
14
HRC was nominated in 2016. Yet we cry sexism. Obama was elected twice. Yet we cry racism. Com'on folks, women (like men) are no homogeneous group. Becoming president is one of the most competitive fields. Women usually take time off for raising kids and stay at home. It is a conscious choice. But when that happens they lose out from fellow men and women who are in the field, be it workforce or politics. Each and every one of us have biases and we ourselves are not even aware of most. Think twice before crying sexism (or racism) as when we do we are doing a disservice to the great country USA and it people.
2
I believe this simply proves the obvious. The American public cannot take a smart, articulate, assertive woman in a leadership position. Angry men or gaffe-prone but otherwise "decent" men (remember how he treated Anita Hill or Warren herself?) who promise more promise over substance are much preferred. btw, 50% of We the People are also women making the same choice. And I, for one, am tired of hearing how Warren was a "scold", a "cheat" or simply not as "authentic" as Sanders. Held to the same standard, Sanders "cheated" from many socialists before him, yells all the time, and definitely not honest about the internal misogyny within his campaign. One of the reasons I trusted Warren was her authenticity on being working pregnant woman, have NEVER heard that discussed in a presidential campaign, duh, ANY campaign in my life before.
But we will never hold men to the same light, will we?
8
We actually could wave that magic wand and choose Elizabeth Warren--the real favorite of tons of progressive Americans who seem afraid to vote for any woman to be President.
What we have to do: Use ranked-choice balloting in the Democratic primary elections.
You vote for your favorite candidate of a largish field as Choice #1, and then follow with the candidates who would be acceptable to you, as #2, #3, #4, etc. You could then include outliers with stellar possibilities, in political thought, like Sharrod Brown or Michael Bennett, etc. You don't have to eliminate anyone too early, and the "winner" ends up with solid party support. Without all the vitriol, to boot.
We ought to go to Ranked Choice ballots for primaries.
10
There is gender bias in American politics and Elizabeth Warren got caught up in multi-candidate race where her talents couldn't overcome the vote-division math. She split the progressive vote with Bernie but didn't get as big a share because Bernie had a 4-year head start and his huge ground game.
Much of the finger pointing at the patriarchy and sexism should be leveled at the DNC, whose economist self interest motivates them to actively prevent ranked choice voting and proportional representation during the primaries in order to accrue more power to their "king/queen-making" manipulations. All of the chatter about people voting for "who they think can win" is a direct result of the DNC's refusal to allow ranked choice voting in the primaries.
The 15% watermark to get delegates is also designed to winnow the field to make candidates drop out so as to increase the voting power of the super-delegates. Think about it a little: if delegates in primaries were awarded proportionally, then candidates get to carry even their few delegates to the Convention, and with a dozen candidate's delegates, we'd have a real conversation at the convention.
The 15% watermark denies proportional representation and silences those voices. A fairer process would be to have the minimum level to get delegates be a function of the number of people running, so say 8 people are running, and you got more than 2% of the vote, you'd a least get a delegate or two.
4
The fact that she came in 3rd in the state she represents speaks volumes about her electability for the entire country, as for diversity, that’s not what the majority of the public looks for in a candidate. We are a country of immigrants so diversity is already there. The last time around a non politician was elected, how did that diversity work out?
5
First off, let me say that my respect and admiration for Senator Warren is great. While I am only one woman weighing in, for me, voting for Senator Sanders was my immediate instinct. It had nothing to with gender and everything to do with his level of commitment. He is a force that has elevated certain issues for a long time. If he had decided not to run, Senator Warren would have been my choice because she would represent my interests far better than Vice President Biden.
1
Consider the parallels between Senator Warren and Senator Daniel Patrck Moynihan.
Both from humble backgrounds.
Both scholars highly respected in their fields.
Both sought-after teachers.
Both highly respected "Public Intellectuals".
Both accomplished U.S. Senators.
If Senator Moynihan's career is any indication Senator Warren has quite a ways to run yet as a distinguished public servant.
The winds of change are foiled again
Our fate in the hands of old white men
4
When the New York Times in 2020 refers to women as "Ladies" in the headline of an opinion piece written by a woman (who never used that term in her piece), it is clear that progress has not yet been made. And the author a woman on your editorial board, no less!
8
Knock it off! Hillary Clinton received almost 3 million more votes than Donald Trump but Sec. Clinton, with a lifetime of political experience, did not know how to focus on the electoral college while Trump, with no electoral experience, ran a smarter campaign. I have to take a walk when people say that Americans won't elect a woman--the people did; the electoral voters couldn't.
5
Sigh, now I have to support a candidate I didn't want.
3
The most intelligent competitor in the race but not the best politician. I hope whoever the final Democratic incorporates her into his campaign. I hope ever it is, chooses a woman as VP. Pence couldn't stand up to either Warren or Klobuchar.
3
Elizabeth lost me when she did indeed become too strident and shrill. I don't like that trait in male or female candidates. Bernie and Elizabeth split the strident and shrill lovers.
1
I am a white, older male. I was fully supportive of Amy....and then she dropped out. So what is an older, white guy supposed to do now?
1
STOP WRITING THE SAME ARTICLE OVER AND OVER AGAIN. YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM, IF NOT THE ENTIRE PROBLEM!!! Articles like this do nothing but perpetuate gender stereotypes. Everything I've read about gender and the elections is exactly like this article. I never see articles like 'Why a Woman Shouldn't Be President' -not even in conservative news outlets, the negativity and bias comes from this type of article. At first glance, it appears to be on the women's side but the entire article is negative and lists a million reasons why people think women can't win. Ho-hum, woe are we. Everyone already knows all of this info, we hear it all the time. Guess what happens when you hear the same thing over and over-most people start to actually believe it. As the article suggests, especially women! Well done NYT.
How about start writing articles like 'A Woman Will Be the Next President' or 'A Million Reasons Why We Need a Woman for President' or 'Women Leaders Around the World' literally anything that puts a positive spin on women as presidential, world leaders (even if they don't win). Stop talking about gender being such a huge factor and maybe it will be less of a factor. So much of the power lies in the medias hands.
Warren still got my vote on Tuesday.
9
Let's get this out of the way: there are better ways, fairer to all, to pick presidents than the current way.
But to Michelle's column: outcome-oriented processes seem the only redress to her laments--and those of many who share her opinions. I don't have to be a morally and intellectually corrupt Republican (are there many who aren't?) to suggest that there aren't outcome-oriented ways of doing most business that are optimal to anyone's interests.
Late addition: When a woman or a minority runs for the most highly political job in the world, the evils of misogyny and racism will apply to them negatively at some point. That may seem obvious, but the more I read such columns as Michelle's, the more that unstated deserves stating.
1
I find the headline to this piece really condescending.
7
Gender has very little to do with Elizabeth Warren's appeal to me. She's the smartest candidate in the race, and appears to have that rare blend of intelligence, empathy, patience, and drive to get things done right. You couldn't ask for a better POTUS, and it's a damned shame she won't be nominated. The Democratic Party has lost its mind, or its spine.......maybe both.
6
There were a number of people running that were 'diverse' and that's a big positive. Just because the final candidates are white males doesn't mean there was an attempt by the establishment to make that happen. I know the DNC does not want Sanders, so there was influence there, but no one stopped these women or people of color besides the voters. We should NEVER put someone in charge because they are a certain race or gender. PS I wanted Amy, but that's because of what she said and how she presented herself, not because she's a woman.
1
I'm hoping Biden or Bernie chooses Warren, Harris or Klobachar as VP. That'd be a huge step in the right direction. We've never had a woman V.P.
This man has no problem with a woman POTUS - Since that snowstorm, I've admired and contributed to Amy Klobuchar. Although she and Warren did best among the women candidates, both have dropped out of the race. Why? Not enough votes! Sure, misogyny played a role in that shortcoming. But, HRC got the majority vote last time.
Not even Amy with her tough, sharp mind, dry humor, sensible progressive ideas [it was she who pointed out, "bold ideas are not necessarily good ideas"?] could make the kind of emotional connection that Bernie and Joe have made.
3
Sorry, Senator Warren. You ran to lead a country and lift up a citizenry that does not know what leadership looks like when it doesn't wear a tie. We do not deserve you. Thanks for all your sacrifices to come this far.
9
@Miller And oh dear god that you should ever appear on stage dressed as you choose with those in ties. Breathtaking, just breathtaking that people don't comprehend the thoughts their brain produces.
2
Biden now would be well-advised to build a team of surrogate campaigners who might join him, if elected, in the cabinet not as figure heads but as partners and entrepreneurs in making government more effective.
At the top of the ticket, Biden should ask a Black woman to join him. Stacy Abrams is oft mentioned, but I think a more strategic choice would be Val Demings congresswoman from Florida.
Demings was a shining star on the Democrat's Impeachment team, and could help win Florida in the general election, which would be a death blow for Trump.
She also could make the case the 19 Republican senators who are up for re-election this time have proven their unfitness for office by acquitting Trump without even calling one witness.
Also invited to crusade against Trump should include earlier candidates ill-served by scheduling two almost completely white states first. Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Andrew Yang, and Julian Castro should be invited to join the crusade to focus on constituencies with which they resounded.
And some of these might go on, if Biden is elected, to form a team with Biden to govern the nation in cabinet positions. Kamala Harris as AG, Pete Buttigieg at DOD, and Andrew Yang at Commerce would be wonderful choices.
Susan Rice as Secretary of State, and Elizabeth Warren as Secretary of Treasury, if she will accept it, would be great appointments as well.
Women need to be represented in the campaign as well as the minorities who always vote blue.
1
Stop. Just stop. Warren is a brilliant, intelligent, and sunny individual. She also happened to run an erratic, often contradictory campaign that started its downward slide as she pandered to every interest group she could identify. Her campaign imploded the moment she started blaming the misogyny of a feminist instead of her own missteps. Stop with the whining, learn your lessons, and come back in 2024.
355
@Mrs Ming
The Democratic party, unlike its opponent, serves more than one constituency. It is less a political party than a coalition of parties huddling around one often shaky tent-pole. It is every Democrat's responsibility to be inclusive and represent as broad a range of interests as possible. To call this 'pandering' is to be wilfully obtuse.
104
@Mrs Ming I can't agree more, she was a solid candidate but her campaign had some shortcomings. If supporters of Biden or Sanders pointed the shortcomings out to her supporters they were often labeled as a misogynist, which could have pushed potential supporters away if it came down to a Sanders/Warren push after Super Tuesday. I wanted her to do well, and if you asked me before the last week I would have assumed it would be her and Sanders neck & neck right now. She had the right credentials but the wrong campaign. Of course, I say that with the benefit of hindsight.
31
@Jorrocks
Exactly. While the chorus continues to shout diversity is our strength, the multiple groups represented within the Democratic party threaten to fraction without the super glue of defeating Trump holding them all together. Even with that single issue to bind them, there is still in-fighting and contests to see who can be the "Wokest" among the groups.
The real questions and friction between these groups will not be sated forever, having a common enemy at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Trump will not and is not the Emperor for life and once he is gone, it will not bring about the utopia as some believe.
20
I still think Warren is best but in this country, to be ambitious, smart, and female makes you a target, not a treasure. If Bernie or Biden gets the nod I’ll hold my nose and vote for them but not happily.
1090
@Catherine Green Exactly. It's hard to believe this is true in 2020, but unfortunately it is.
91
@Catherine Green "The sting of Mrs. Clinton’s defeat still painful, many in the party were hesitant to take a chance on another woman" says it all. I'm both sad and embarrassed that our country is afraid to elect a woman. But defeating trump and the GOP is essential for our country to continue as a democracy.
198
@Chelle
Women vote and they didnt vote for her. so this is a women's issue, Women vote more than men
18
Men like to pretend misogyny doesn’t exist. Women do not have that luxury. Men get second, third, more chances. Women get one, under a microscope.
Biden stumbled many times during this race, and he will stumble many more. Trump will use all his powers of office and the DOJ, and now agencies of Intelligence, to take down Biden. Republicans gave him free range to use the powers of State in his campaign by refusing to even stage an actual trial in the Senate.
But we will run Biden and Democratic leadership will be surprised when Trump’s troops lead him off the campaign in handcuffs, figuratively if not literally.
Warren glitched once, when she actually admitted a single payer healthcare system would require a transition period. That was enough to enrage the progressives who can forgive Bernie anything, but a woman must be infallible.
Warren, like all the other women in this campaign — in this country— had no room for error.
1908
@Chickpea
While it may be fashionable to explain away everything with "sexism," Warren's campaign was largely a carbon copy of Bernie's campaign, and Bernie has been saying the same things for longer.
So with respect to Warren, whom I voted for, I can understand why she didn't get further.
65
@Chickpea The first step to getting a woman elected President is to stop blaming sexism when a woman loses.
69
@Chickpea "Warren, like all the other women in this campaign — in this country— had no room for error."
And men always take the blame when a female candidate botches her own campaign, even when the candidate fails miserably to connect with female voters. Rinse and repeat.
43
“ Man or woman, winning the presidency is not merely — or even largely — a question of merit.” So true. I suggest that Ms. Cottle and others who have lead voices in the media would do our country a great service by focusing their coverage and commentary more on questions of merit. How about more exploration of what it takes to do the president’s extraordinarily complex job well in the context of challenges our country currently faces? How about more exploration of what qualities of mind, experience, and skills each candidate would bring to the job, instead of focusing so heavily on every little gaffe and misstep?
1
The US certainly would elect a woman as president today. Just not this woman.
2
@Joel Sanders Which woman? Name her, so we can all write her in. We'll wait.
2
This just a grim reality of American life.
It seems that a nation is incapable to evolve to higher dimensions, just trapped in archaic base.
The point of being human is to be constantly evolving.
That's why we're here.
Clinging to the old way of thinking is just laziness of the mind.
We never been the nation of fear!
Obviously we need a Woman as a President!
We better hurry up Ladies!
2
When in history have women been leaders? (Elizabeth I is a happy outlier.) When did they rise and take power themselves by sheer force of will? In the groups of hunter/gatherers, when was it women who were the leaders and protectors? Who are the women that have spawned religious movements?
Do you think that just because the progressive script calls for it, everyone is going to vote for a woman based merely on the content of their chromosomes?
I absolutely believe that the combination of Trump must be defeated and woman candidate as the defeater was the one two punch that KOed Warren. Biden should ask her to be VP.
1
Do voters believe that only a man can defeat Trump? I’m afraid so and it’s wrong. A strong young candidate could defeat him. The contrast between the doddering fool Trump and a younger female candidate would have been greater than that of red-faced white-haired men in their seventies. Warren is in her seventies but she’s so physically fit she looks like 60.
The US system is corrupt. It is institutionally structured to exclude a whole range of people, women being the most obvious. Put it this way - if you and I had a game of heads v tails in coin tossing, and after 250 or so goes it came up heads every single time then I (who had bet on tails) would say, ‘hey what’s going on here - the game is rigged’. This is the much vaunted US democracy. It is thoroughly corrupt.
Warren was a sellout who should have dropped out for her mentor Sanders' sake if she had any concern for the people of America.
2
I proudly voted for Elizabeth Warren. She nailed every economic issue impacting our nation, and the insurance companies are stealing us blind. I think brilliant women scare the insecure electorate. The pathetic incompetent currently destroying our democratic republic would have been humiliated in a debate with Liz. I pray Biden can beat 45, but it will otherwise be a waste of the next 4 years.
2
Joe's going to be hiring. Dems have a deep bench and that includes Warren, Klobuchar, Abrams, Harris, among others.
2
She is just like all the other Democrats ...they propose all this Free stuff for everyone ....and then when asked "How will they pay for it?' they stumble....then remember go to answer number one....TAX The Rich/ then when shown that will not cover the cost...there is a long round of defective statements/ and eventually they admit that the middle class as well will be TAXED...at this point the interview is over for it is beyond obvious they do NOT Know what they are talking about!
1
Yes - Decent Appearance MATTERS -- even when you're a woman.
Elizabeth , you need to improve your choice of clothes - really. Wearing black pants over and over again, sometimes black leggings (!) and sneakers (like in this photo!) with your outdated pastel color jackets --- Please. IT MATTERS.
Have no fears, ladies, 2024 is your year. Her name is Nikki Haley.
3
If the Democrats are so enlightened, how can they coalesce around Warren G. Biden ?
"It’s impossible to know the degree to which gender factors into a candidate’s political appeal..."
"Ms. Warren is thought to have struggled in part because she was too professorial..to connect with anyone beyond white college-educated women like herself."
It might have nothing to do with Sen. Warren or her message. It could just be that Sen. Sanders, who has been running since 2016 and has a highly committed constituency, simply cemented the progressive vote.
1
If Biden eeks this out, his only real choice for VP is Sanders...if he wants to win easily, but some
people would rather lose than smell the coffee.
(See 2016 race wherein H. Clinton chose wrong).
But back to this woman’s equality aspect. I simply do not understand what the author here is talking about! Many people were desiring for the women who were running to come out on top this time around and also many good female candidates chose not to run at all!
We heard of Oprah—didn’t run!
Then there was the best First Lady we’ve ever had: Michele Obama—Didn’t run!
Then there’s some women who didn’t even think of it, like Dr. Brené Brown, sad to say, with all her wonderful humanity and human connection experience (which we badly need right now)...
SHE DIDN’T RUN!
So please, take your violin playing this sad song and put it back into its case! It’s hard running for U.S. President and one day we will have a female as the top person, but she will indeed have to run!
So, your article really should read: why are so many highly qualified women letting their country down by not running!
1
Frankly I do not think there is but one reason why there is no female presidential candidate. The country is not YET ready for a female POTUS. From issues involving commander-in-chief of the armed forces to foolish concerns about a woman's temperment.
The first woman president will be a moderate, maybe even republican, from somewhere in the midwest or south.
Hyper educated, leftist, white New England feminist is not a popular model in most of the US. They are easily viewed as elitist, out of touch, preachy, maybe anti-male.
--"for the party of progress, youth and diversity, a final face-off between two lifelong politicians born during World War II leaves much to be desired."
1. "Progress" is not thwarted because one doesn't embrace, for example, the idea (actually, the plan to pay for) Medicare for All as opposed to a public option for Medicare.
2. The party of "youth": in the 2016 election, 49% of the Dem votes were Boomers and Silents. If youth want to influence--welcome--come on down to the polls! Bernie's didn't on Super Tuesday.
3. "Diversity" had its first official test in SC. Biden won.
To be clear, this post isn't touting any candidate; I'm a lifelong liberal Dem. Instead, it's about the slippery use of language (and image) that is going full steam ahead. (According to Sanders now, if I don't vote for him, I'm a member of the "establishment"--whatever that means. News to this old hippie.)
I would put in a word here for Jennifer Steinhauer's, fact-based opinion piece in today's NYT.
I had no idea that Ocasio-Cortez won her election on the strength of the gentrified, college-educated and that her opponent "prevailed in most working-class corners of the district, including the district’s Hispanic and African-American enclaves; he beat Ms. Ocasio-Cortez by more than 25 points in her own Parkchester section of the Bronx."
It's about time politicians and journalists realized that you can't predict what a voter will decide based on any kind of personal demographic.
1
Yes, it’s way past due for the United States to have a female president. Perhaps we need to have a parliamentary system of government to achieve that.
If I see one more reference to Warren's likeability, I think I'll scream. This country put a narcissistic, incompetent, corrupt, and irredeemably repulsive man in the Oval Office three years ago, but God forbid a female candidate might be labeled difficult or un-likeable. We're not voting for a best friend; we're voting for a president! As I sat with my ballot yesterday, I asked myself who of the remaining Democratic candidates would I trust to lead us through the current pandemic crisis, and the answer was unequivocal: Warren. Would I want to share a beer with her? Probably not, but I would happily hold her Michelob Ultra if it meant she could lead our country instead of Donald Trump.
6
I am all for women leaders who earn it and not get it just because they are women. Why the so called ‘backward’ or ‘3rd world’ countries had strong, powerful women leaders decade back. Sirimavo Bandaranaike(Sri Lanka, 1960s), Indira Gandhi(India 1970 f1980s), Benazir Bhutto(Pakistan, 1990s), Hasina Wajed and Begum Khalida Zia(Bangladesh, for a long time till today)were not elected because they were women and they played the gender card. They got elected because they were true ‘leaders’ of the people. That should be emulated here.
3
Women are a majority and have had the vote since long before I was born. A majority of white women voted for Trump, showing that women are significant drivers of this problem. All women have to do is decide to elect more women, and it won't matter what men think.
1
NOT MISOGYNY
Elizabeth Warren has only herself to blame. The nomination was hers. It was her moment. She built a great operation and had all the momentum behind her. Then she started to speak out of both sides of her mouth. She refused to answer a simple yes-or-no question on whether her Medicare For All plan would raise taxes on the middle class, and came across as dishonest. Then she accused Pete Buttigieg of taking money from millionaires and billionaires when she had done the same thing herself when she ran for the senate, and became a hypocrite. And just last week she started taking Super PAC money when she promised she wouldn’t accept a dime of Super PAC money, and became an even bigger hypocrite. If your brand is an honest straight-shooter who won’t play the usual Washington games, then you cannot—absolutely cannot—start playing the usual Washington games.
The tragedy is that Elizabeth Warren is genuinely brilliant, accomplished, likable, and honest. She just lost her way in the heat of the campaign when it started to slip away from her. She will make a great Senate Majority Leader.
The even greater tragedy is that someone even more brilliant and accomplished and—yes—likable and honest than Elizabeth Warren is not sitting in the Oval Office today. That she is not IS misogyny.
Cheers to Hillary Clinton, the forebear—the first woman elected by popular vote to become President of the United States. History will be much kinder to her than America was in 2016.
1
she was the wrong woman at the wrong time. Following the disastrous Hillary, she was always gping to drop out. Against the men,who are not exactly Obama, she screeched and squalled and claimed a heritage that was laughable. I long for a woman President, but I don't see one on the horizon. I
Does the fact that a Jewish candidate stands a chance at the US presidency not strike you, at all, as remarkable. I am a *big* fan of Elizabeth Warren and *really* wanted her to be the nominee, but I grew up hearing how the US would elect a woman and an African-American before it would someone Jewish. Now we face the possibility of a Jewish, self-described socialist (if *that* isn't a bold stereotype thrown at Jews since the 19th Century!), will be the president.
Sad for our loss of Warren, but progress is still possible this election cycle.
1
I'm an old, educated, reasonable and partly wise shrink who can judge people by the "content of their character" (M.L. King). I voted for Hillary back then. But I'm telling you, with all my lovely qualities, I could hardly stand her bulging glass eyeballs and that fake laugh. Still buried up to my big toe in male socialization of the 1950's, I require women who seek power to fit in a very narrow slice of a continuum of acceptability. Strong, but not masculine. Not necessarily attractive but not freak-showish. No bubbly ditziness. Just a tiny bit of anger -- nothing intimidating. Men? They can be all over the place for me. If an "enlightened" soul like me can be this irrational, just think of the psychic terrain of the plebeian majority!
2
Unfortunately not a chance. Looser Hillary Clinton is still venting her jealous rage against Bernie Sanders for competing against her in the 2016 primaries. Had. Bernie been the candidate we would not have people dying from the trump virus. Hillary placed doubt in the electorate that a woman has the emotional capable of being president. She should disappear and spend the time spending her billions Ms Warren I believe would have made a good President She has Clinton to blame for not making it
2
Old white guy here just wants to say he totally agrees and couldn't understand what the problem is, but now I see: Women candidates can be great, but America indeed isn't. Don the Con was right in diagnosis.
Disclosure: My offspring are both female, so some might say I'm biased. Indeed.
1
Maybe we could ban men from running for office until we get everything straightened out?
The problem with narrowly subscribing to any philosophy is that you will be prone to confirmation bias everywhere, everything is filtered through your theory's belief set. This is often the problem with feminists. They see everything as a manifestation of sexism or mysoginy whereas many times it has nothing to do with that. Both Clinton and Warren are just plain fake and unlikeable! They both lack natural charisma that Obama and Clinton had and Hillary has admitted as much herself. Margaret Thatcher was the longest serving British Prime Minister of the 20th century for 11 long years and that too during the 70s & 80s which was obviously a more conservative time than 2020. But then Margaret was incredible! She was so strong and amazing and original, no one had any doubt who was in charge when the 'Iron lady' was on the throne. Do you really see any Thatcher in Hillary or Warren? No? Well that's because there isn't. Oh course that does not mean that Biden or Bernie are any better or that sexism doesn't exist. But 'everything' is not sexism. The only thing worse than gender bias is compromising merit for the sake of identity politics.
2
Be careful ladies. Nimrata Haley is making noise all over social media. Don't be surprised if Pence gets the boot for the coronavirus crisis, names Haley and Trump hangs it up, riding down Pennsylvania Avenue with a big parade with tanks, marching bands and hookers and fireworks over the Potomac.
By the way, that 1% death rate Trump pulled out of his colon yesterday on a "hunch," using the numbers reported in the US with 158 cases and 11 deaths, that's a kill rate of 6.95%. Even for a guy who loves records, that might require a little revision with the ol' Sharpie.
3
How about this for Ms Warren. She had the likability of Ms Clinton and the integrity of Mr Clinton. As a 50 year Times reader I suggest your editorial board decision should serve as an embarrassment of judgement that diminishes your standing.
1
"ladies" Who are you addressing, Scarlet O'hara?
Thank you, my thoughts exactly.
I don't know what the NYT stylebook says, but if you're going to recognize that Gillibrand, Harris, and Klobuchar are senators, shouldn't you afford the same courtesy to Sanders and Warren? And on first reference, Biden would normally be referred to as the former vice president and Hillary Clinton should be titled Secretary as a courtesy.
1
This article is everything for how I feel about politics right now. My mom, a feminist even more than I am (if that's possible!) voted for Biden. Why, I asked her? Well, I thought Warren was out... my response: "Not if you voted for her!" (which I did)
So yes, here we are again, two old white men facing off against another old white man. Sigh....
2
Bernie friends, Trump is trying to sow division, screaming “rigged” at every turn. Don’t buy it. Please don't buy Trump's propaganda. We’re having a contest of real voters. Nothing wrong with that. No superdelegate nonsense. Like Bernie says, let's give the nom to whoever gets the most votes. Above all, from Bernie to Biden voters: what unites us is much more than what divides. I don’t just mean despising Trump. Bernie and Biden both want to (1) get more healthcare to more people. We might disagree on the means but we can’t deny Biden means it; he helped Obama get healthcare to >15 million folks who didn’t have it, most folks with lower income or pre-existing conditions; (2) reduce gun deaths, via background checks, waiting periods, renewing assault weapons ban, maybe even repealing gun maker immunity from liability, etc. (3) reverse trump tax cuts for rich, raising capital gains taxes so middle class incomes are not taxed higher than rich folks investments, raising effective corporate taxes via closing loopholes (no more Amazon 0%!), and more. (4) fight climate change. (5) restoring honesty decency good governance and respect for science to the EPA CDC etc (Obama and Biden created an epidemics “czar” on NSC which Trump eliminated). (6) humane treatment of immigrants. (7) protect voting rights (~700 polling stations closed in TX since ~2013), and much much more. I know there are big important disagreements, but there are big agreements too. Let's defeat Trump together.
2
Don't give up Ladies. Tulsi Gabbard is still in the race. You can rally around her. She appears to have the qualifications that you deem the most important.
How many white men have run for the presidency since the start of the republic? Over 1,000?
How many have won? 44
It's hard to win the presidency. The fact that a mere handful of women and people of color have run and lost (excluing Obama) is not representative of racism and sexism; just that it's very hard to win.
27
@Greg That's a false narrative considering that for the vast majority of that time the only people who were allowed to run were land-owning white men. Think about all of the women and POC who might have made a difference in a variety of elected office, had they been given the opportunity to run.
28
@Greg Ha! Women in this country have only been able to VOTE for a hundred years. Women and people of color have been jailed and killed in their fight for equality since this country was born. You think we’d have had a woman in the highest office if more of them had just taken a stab at it?
Sure. It’s just a numbers game.
34
So - she wasn't handed a participation trophy for checking the gender box? Maybe she would have drawn more support if she hadn't thrown so many under the bus in grasping for that box.
She lost me for that reason.
2
A highly qualified woman ran for President in 2016 as the Democratic nominee. She was pummeled by Bernie Sanders in the primaries and many of his supporters refused to vote for her in the General Election, resulting in the nightmare Presidency of Donald J. Trump. Think about that as you question why voters are hesitant to support female candidates in 2019.
A highly qualified woman ran for president in 2016? Hillary’s term as a NY senator was lack luster at best and her tenure as Sec of State was a complete bumbling failure. So explain how she was a qualified candidate? Her only redeeming quality was that she was not Trump.
Democrats and liberals obsession with Trump will lead to unfortunately Trump getting a second term. It was proven in 2016 that two states, California and New York do not speak for the other 48 states and territories that make up this republic and the sideshow circus clown bus of candidates that the Democrats put up for this election proves that. In Texas a major player for electoral votes Trump beat Biden by over 2 to 1 in votes.
America is basically in its mid “terrible twos” (yes we are 244yrs old as a country) as a country. The side that the media is fixated on portraying are the ones who are kicking and screaming on the floor because they didn’t get their way. This country will survive four more years of Trump, (not by my choice) so my question is will you?
1
I will vote for Biden when/if he's the candidate in the general election, in the same manner I voted for Clinton 4 years ago...with great reluctance, because even with his many shortcomings, grievous past errors and deep flaws, the most important thing is getting Trump out of office.
Senator Warren isn't perfect. No human being is.
She made her share of missteps, misspeaks.
But she was, in my humble womanly view, the best we've had so far of women running for the presidency.
Bravo to her!
Now we get to see what moves she makes to be a king-maker, since our presidents are still " kings". No" queens" yet, but I believe she has inched us closer.
1
Last night's end result is a big gift to all of us navel surveyors.
We no longer need to care about what the NYTime's staff tells us to watch or warns us about any given candidate because all their picks died without a fight.
We no longer need to care about MSNBC analysts because none of them ever loved Biden. I can't remember Rachel featuring Joe. Rachel's nightly Russia investigation isn't necessary - the average person made it clear - America just wants a boring, straight guy- that's it and Russian meddling goes away. . . do you get that? No need for the Mueller Report if the Democrats could just have a guy like Mueller at the top of the ticket. God it's painfully simple.
2
"So there are a lot of women who might not vote for a woman because they’re worried that other voters won’t vote for her. But if everyone just voted for who they actually wanted to be president, the woman would win!"
Similarly, there seem to be a lot of people who would support Sanders if they didn't think that others wouldn't. The stakes are high in this election so I think people may be weighing these factors more than usual, and not to our benefit, unfortunately.
I do agree, people hold women to a higher standard. When a man maneuvers, it might be viewed as smart strategy; a woman is viewed as a conniving... you know the word.
Additionally, when women in an arena that's traditionally male, they sometimes alter their persona--not intentionally necessarily, but when it happens, it can seem to hurt their credibility.
Men don't consciously or subconsciously alter their persona to compete with a female, so they don't experience this type of credibility problem. Other credibility problems they do face are often shared among most candidates and are of the familiar, politics as usual, type.
Finally, it's important to realize that while women would love to see a female candidate, we can't vote for a female *just because* she's female. We'd like to believe in her values, but equally important, we want her to be successful because like it or not, she's going to reflect on our entire gender.
I feel that the first female POTUS will be a Republican. No dog in the fight, but suburban women are moderate. Hillary should have won but was swindled. I feel someone like Condoleeza Rice would flourish.
1
Golly, I feel so beat up on, so disrespected, so discriminated against-- because I'm a straight, white, male, septuagenarian.
Nah, not really! Life without grievances and resentments-- try it sometime!
Now, the septuagenarian part ain't that great....
Elizabeth Warren for Vice President!
Biden-Warren is the kind of dream ticket Thomas Friedman was pushing here in the NY Times on February 25. This would also help bring in the left wing Bernie Bros. And it would keep her excellent voice on issues like consumer protection in the senate as the 101st vote in case of ties.
Reading this article I’m reminded of a recurring comment made by friends and relatives who “just didn’t like” Hillary: that they’d vote for a woman for president, just not that particular woman. Yet, when pressed, not one of them could name a woman they would vote for.
6
Perceived concerns about electability.
Early on, several of my women friends whispered that they liked Senator Warren, quite a bit. Yet, their perceptions about Hillary loss made them wary of Warren's chances of defeating Trump, their #1 goal.
In my view, Hillary didn't lose the election. She was defeated by foreign-source propaganda, Comey's professional negligence, and egregious voter suppression. Nevertheless, even with these facts, Warren seemed too risky for them.
If Democrats are successful in November, personally I would like to see Senator Warren considered for Attorney General or the US Supreme Court, where she can influence the generational, structural change that she seeks on a range of economic and structural issues such as antitrust, banking and securities, immigration, voting rights, to a greater extent than the US Senate.
2
God, I sure hope so, it's more than past time for a woman president. The sad part is that the women who led the way like Hillary and Elizabeth won't ever get there-it will be younger women who benefit from the trailblazers who made it possible, and that is too sad for words.
3
Elizabeth is warm, kind, intelligent, educated isn’t THAT what a good school teacher is?
Give me a break all of you who think she is school “marmish”!
A lot of us remember fondly a school marm who made a difference in our lives, a positive difference, even a life changing direction!
I cannot stomach any more white males who think they are God’s gift to us and could care less about women issues, no matter how “progressive” they portray themselves. But when it comes time to make laws they go back to their caves dragging their women by the hair! (Figure of speech, all you guys out there...)
I am so angry, as you can tell I’m sure, that this country is still so backwards, compared to other European and Middle Eastern and African countries, who cannot elect a woman to a position of authority and give pitiful, mysogenistic excuses for not doing so. Shame on US!
5
I hope that Warren withholds her endorsement from both Sanders and Biden until one of them offers her the VP slot with a guarantee of only 4 years in office (because of age) and a shot at running in 4 years. She is the best this country has to offer. It would be sad to go from mentally ill and moronic (Trump) to medocrity (Biden) or visionary without know-how (Sanders) when greatness is called for.
3
@Dissatisfied
#BlueTsunami2020
#BidenWarren
I think the real key to getting a woman elected, besides having the right people around them, which I don't think Warren did, was getting a woman elected as VP first, that is still one of the best paths to the white house. Yes, senators and congresspeople and governors win, but the exposure as VP is a big deal. Among other things, on a winning ticket (Geraldine Ferraro sadly was on losing ticket and was blamed, unfairly, for the loss). Having a woman get into the VP slot will tell the party that a woman is not a liability, and also sends a message from the party that they are serious about women candidates (sorry, Palin was not a serious candidate, just read what Steve Schmidt wrote about that one).
From crystal magic to hammer and sickle time, the coruscating cast of characters masquerading for President on the Democrat side of the ledger was right out of a Dr. Seuss book. With tetchy Bernie ruling center stage, this ineffable protean comedy, evolving in multiple acts, has taken a dramatic shift. Prematurely sent out to pasture, a near trompe l'oeil has occurred reanimating a forlorn Joe Biden, he of the Malaprop a minute career politician moniker, resuscitating him to suddenly front runner status causing the Socialist Grinch to sneer with a rictus of repulsion.
This Shakespearean drama has cut the cast to two. We await the final act when the curtain closes.
10
@Grant
Thanks for reminding us that even comment sections can be a literary vehicle.
2
@Grant Marianne Williamson aside I thought the Democratic field was actually quite impressive. Everyone was smart and determined to make serious changes to bring the country back from this disaster of an administration. Yes, Biden had his gaffs, but have you heard Trump string a sentence together that is coherent? And the proof of how serious and smart this group is, is the fact that they are all stepping aside to let the race narrow to the strongest candidates. That is about putting the country first instead of one's own ego. That's pretty impressive. I could have voted for almost any one of them with confidence.
20
@LeeBee I’m with LeeBee. The field of Democratic candidates earned my respect by their intelligence, dedication to pursuing their vision of what’s best for our country, and fundamental decency. They do not deserve ridicule. And by the way, using big words does not make writing literary.
14
“Stop with the whining, learn your lessons, and come back in 2024.” That advice from Mrs Ming is right on the money. People aren’t interested in being told how they must vote. Get over it and move on.
Why weren't all these quivering, angry, people up in arms 4 years ago whenWarren dragged her feet so long they had calluses on them when it came to Hillary? Now that Warren is stuck in the same boat, all of a sudden, it's an outrage, an outrage.
There is one difference. Hillary won Massachusetts, the nomination, and the popular vote. She should be president. This campaign does give credence to the old saw, " A woman president? Yes. Just not this woman." That said, the two greatest victories in this campaign? Misogyny and homophobia.
1
I am a middle-aged white man who was proud to support Warren. Her intelligence, compassion, energy, and policy detail (as opposed to vague talk of "revolution" or "healing") made her stand out from her competitors of both genders. (I suspect, in fact, that her very specificity turned off a certain type of voter - "who has time to read all those boring proposals?," etc. Sigh.)
I sincerely hope that she continues to "persist" in the Senate and hold the next President's feet to the fire on income inequality, global warming, and so many other issues.
It is also incumbent upon Biden or Sanders to choose a female running mate. That way, if one of them can take back the White House, Americans will have several years to get used to the idea of a woman holding national office... which will finally put us in sync with the rest of the Western World.
Elizabeth Warren would have had a better run had she opted to think more like a politician than a movement leader. Politicians need to build coalitions with others in their party. Politicians need to get elected. She used experts in the field to craft her plans for everything except how to get elected.
1
Complaining about qualification, policy stances, and personal character is perfectly fair game in political races.
But if one truly believes in equality, it should not matter that the Democratic Nominee will be white, male, and over 77 years of age.
What matters is qualifications.
"I don't want an old white male" is simultaneously ageist, sexist, and racist. And just as prejudiced as any other permutation of that statement involving younger or non-white or non-males. Don't act like it isn't.
3
Would highly recommend Elizabeth Warren as Vice-President nominee on the ticket. She’s a people person with excellent ideas for an economy that helps everyone. Plus, she’s just so darn smart!
1
Exactly. An excellent article.
After the way white women voted for Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton (by far the most qualified candidate), I will not vote for a woman in a primary (except maybe Oprah Winfrey).
Why didn't Klobuchar endorse Warren instead of Biden. After all, besides being a better candidate than Biden, she is a woman.
1
Many people voted for the Donald because he is ‘one of them’. I guess in the mid west many people live in a 50 floor gold plated high rise with their name all over it.
Somehow he connected to them despite all the lies, bluster and him being very different, They forgive him for every bad thing he forces upon them because they get something. This is what none of the ladies managed to do. But it is not the message or actions as Donald shows. I have a strong suspicion a big portion of it is that America as a whole is not yet ready for a female president. Unfortunately.
1
I will keep your bumper sticker on my car. Elizabeth, you would be the perfect president. Nobody campaigned harder. I am devastated but proud of the good judgement we all know you have, of your difficult decision to leave the the race.
1
Warren was an awful candidate. Back tracking major positions & right up to the last debate still couldn't identify her real primary opponent.
Deservedly finished THIRD in her home state. Save face & future and get behind your 'establishment' colleague JOE!
1
Oh please. Playing that gender card for all it's worth, huh? How did Margaret Thatcher or Angela Merkel break that breakable glass ceiling? Or Ann Richards in Texas, etc.? They did it by leadership, appealing policies and demeanor, whatever you might think of their politics. Would anyone confuse Warren's well-meaning but, yes, schoolmarmish, pleading with a true presidential contender? Remember also hanging over Warren's head is that she's a former Republican--and isn't particularly popular in her home, very liberal state (see last night's results).
1
Another point -- in the South Carolina debate when asked what verse/saying each candidate lives by -- Warren quoted fully about the Bible verse Mathew-25 about treating the least fortunate the best. Biden said "You are defined by courage and redeemed by loyalty." He "does what he says". Um ok....not accurate and unclear how thematically useful. That being said, he won!
Are you addressing the ladies that are the majority of the American population, or the ladies that are the majority of the American electorate, or the ladies that are the majority of the Democratic Party? It’s not clear whom you’re blaming. But given that the last lady to run for president received three million more votes than her male opponent - and lost - it appears that the electoral college is your bad guy.
So much for diversity? When picking a leader diversity doesn’t mean much, quality and intelligence matter. Hey you want diversity, the last election a non politician was elected and especially if you’re a liberal how’s that working out for you?
FYI, I’m not a Trump supporter and I didn’t vote for him.
1
If Democrats lose this election it will be because Biden and Bernie insisted on running, rather than making room for newer faces to lead the party’s two wings. As a Democrat, I’d feel a lot better about our chances in November if this race had come down to Klobuchar and Warren instead of two old white guys. But, hey... vote blue no matter who.
1
I'm still for Elizabeth Warren.
She's isn't dead and last I heard still running.
Funny how so many posters are blaming 'sexism' for Warren's failures. Hillary Clinton DID win the popular vote four years ago. Despite running an abysmal campaign. America has already proven that it's ready for a female president. Just has to be the right one.
2
Women counting on other women to support them hasn’t worked in 4,000 years of history. Don’t blame the men.
2
It's official! I now dislike Elizabeth Warren as much as I dislike Hillary Clinton. C'mon, is this really the best we have?
Warren like Hillary Clinton, facd the unexpected challenge of getting women to support their candidacies. Hillary lost white women is o a misogynistic Trump and Warren was likely doomed to suffer the same fate. Why? Maybe, it is subconscious self hate or loathing. I would still be concerned that white women will reject a female Vice President—black or white. Women seem to be holding women to a higher standard than men also.
I don’t understand the thesis under which this article is written. She ran, she lost. Enough with blaming “old white men”. Youth and progressives voted, just not for her by all accounts.
Please, stop with the myopic Hillary hagiography. Yes, gender no doubt was a factor against her. But it also was a factor in her favor in her nomination. And in the general it was only one of several others: her own poor attitude of over-confident and even smug and obvious entitlement, her Bill baggage and her own baggage, credibility and trustworthiness issues, and downright poor campaigning strategies and calculus. Hillary Clinton lost that race, it wasn't taken from her. (Forget the popular vote whining - you have to play the game as it is.)
But keep up the gender complaint. Alongside the legitimate issue, it's a cottage industry and ricebowl that must be fed.
Sad that diversity has been reduced to gender and skin color. It's so much more than that.
1
Imagine an addle-brained gaff-prone 70+year old woman running for president who is also a poor / inconsistent debater. You can't. Imagine a Twitter trolling nickname-calling uninformed prolifically lying bully for whom daily briefings are presented mostly in pictures that also obscure facts that threaten her fear-based belief system. You can't. Oh, and imagine a woman not considered acceptably "likable" ever winning a presidency. You can't imagine that either.
1
When will America ever be ready to join the rest of the world and elect a woman as President? We’ve had highly qualified women ready and able to serve. I sure hope whoever gets the Dem nomination taps someone like Klobuchar as Vice and appoints Warren to a high office.
Why do we always want old white guys?
And now that the Democratic field is narrowing, my vote in the WA primary for one of the women candidates is a worthless vote, since our election isn’t until March 10 but I have already cast my ballot by mail.
If you want a woman who can destroy all the gender bias then get Senator Duckworth to run. Imagine her presence on the debate stage. Imagine her pointing her finger at "bone spur" Trump and questioning his right to be "Commander-in Chief".
What has happened to Elizabeth Warren is what's been happening to women for generations. Back in the 1960s, I used to hear my father say that women would naturally rise to senior positions in the huge corporation where he worked, because so many great women were now in lower-level jobs there. Over thirty years later, he was still saying the same thing. That corporation has yet to have a woman CEO...or a large number of women on its board of directors.
As long as we're used to having men run everything, not enough people will vote women into leadership positions.
1
If Hillary Clinton had run a better campaign, she would have won. Chasing after states like Arizona and Georgia, while taking other states for granted, was not the way to go.
Hopefully she will get a prominent cabinet position in the Sanders or Biden govt - and ‘prove’ herself for the ‘next’ time. Maybe even as VP?
But look on the bright side.
Marianne Williamson is actually beating Corey Booker in California.
The two best female candidates were Tulsi and Amy. The New York Times largely ignored both until Kamala dropped out. Then they started pumping up Amy because they wanted to endorse two women.
Tulsi, on the other hard, they smeared time and time again.
4
More than half the voters are women. I guess women like men better.
If you want to see a woman as president, the female candidate must do three things.
1-Do not run as a woman.
2-Ditto.
3-Ditto.
It as lethal to Hillary. Most Americans are sick and tired of identity politics whether it comes from the right Trump or the left Hillary.
It was fatal to her. Trump won the identity obsessed contest by a tko.
Obama was the master teacher. He ran as an American uniting people and not as an angry young black man dividing people.
1
She has no one to blame but herself.
3
Straight white septuagenarian male wanted to fight over soul of party before enlistment to vanquish ogre. Women, gays, blacks, and those born after the beginning of the Korean War need not apply.
A not PC comment, but someone needs to say it.
The idea that we must have a minority President no matter what their qualifications has been a disaster. Obama's bad performance during his presidency killed it for Afro American for a long time. Hillary's performance ruled out women for a generation (and she still owns the DNC.) The Latino population has not yet found someone of presidential timber, despite having some bright candidates..
The reality that white men go to white schools and prepare themselves for political positions whereas the others do not - which is unfortunate, but will come if we survive 4 more years of Trump, an uncertain bet.
The other problem is that those who have taken absolute control of the media as well as the Democrat's party and its mechanisms since 2006 have their own, personal agenda that is corrupt, vengeful, nasty, and probably unbeatable.
And they will lose until, it is too late for a democracy.
If anyone thinks there will be a next time and, if so, any real difference, there is a bridge in Brooklyn I can get cheap and pass on for a small commission.
Women have to wake up to the fact men, beyond the obvious, pay little attention and have less use for them. There is only one way women will become actual partners, not just in our culture, but the world's and that is to step away en masse. Reason is not part of our male makeup. Responsibility for anyone, beyond ourselves, is as foreign to us as feeling life's first kick.
We will feign understanding and broadcast that illusion while we march off to purposely kill our fellow man and, with the same illusion of regret, the women and children who were unfortunately in the path of necessary destruction.
Thousands of years have shown just how feckless the male of our species is, yet women still bow to the arrogance and disdain in which they are held by the testosterone driven ignoramuses who lead most societies.
It is unfortunate Ms Clinton stuck with her abuser and in so doing lost respect and the last election. It is equally unfortunate that any of the women who sought or still seek the Presidency have been and are presently dismissed by men who don't hold a candle to their wit and foresight.
Typically, Mike Bloomberg could have redeemed himself, but showed his true colors by choosing to keep his membership in the old boys club intact rather than showing any indication of wisdom.
We need a woman more than ever
@Ian MacFarlane "Reason is not part of our male makeup."
Please speak for yourself.
It strikes me as odd that so many people attuned to the sensitivities of sexism and racism in language casually describe certain people as “old white guys.”
“White guys” is intentionally dismissive; it’s basically the opposite of saying “sir.” It’s rude, as you well know. And if you want to be treated with respect you should treat others respectfully.
The two female candidates, in spite of opening analogues regarding bombastic divisive Donald Trump, proceeded to attack every male candidate as either grossly rich, uncaring, and worse, sexual predators. Yes ladies, you against us! It'll be refreshing that both are nowhere in site, and the Democratic party can unite, African Americans, Latinos, Females, and yes us Caucasian males seeking an alternative to Mr. Trump.
This is inexcusable identity politics. Fiddling, while the country burns down.
What happened was that, after taking one look at the Emperor describe this Corona Plague as "only a cold, covfefe" America's post-absolutist-monarchy party finally woke up.
Oh and a vigorous male like Mayor Pete will make a suitable VP.
God Help America and God bless whoever runs against the Trump Virus.
so sad. so true. sigh.
The writer shouldn't be troubled. In 2024, I see Nikki Haley as the first female President.
1
@No big deal I surely hope you’re right.
It is very simple, the two men are fools if they don’t have an awesome woman on the ticket. And please, how can we fire Tom Perez?
In the end its the primary voters to blame...why did they not vote for Warren or any other female candidate? Is it the candidate fault or the voters. Or both. who do we blame for our current president- the candidate or the air headed voters who cant think beyong a hot dog cigarette or a beer,
It’s past time to put more women in government at all levels. We’ve seen enough of the testosterone fueled, “my defense budget is bigger than yours” kind if deal. How about this...when Christ came back, he first appeared to women...had to have been a reason.
you state a lot of opinions as fact. they are still opinions.
art
Warren lost me when she decided to attack Bloomberg and Biden instead of Trump.
Traded leadership for media attention.
Trumpine.
Go away.
2
Women just need to keep climbing the wall until they get over it. Do not quit. Persist and resist quitting the challenge.
1
Watch Nikki Haley’s rising star...nothing says the first female will come from the Democrats...(though I hope she does...)
1
I missed the mention of the role media has played in the erasure of women candidates, including the New York Times.
A woman was our nominee last time. Not only that, a blond woman with short hair originally from the Midwest who studied law at Harvard, advised a president and more recently was a Senator from an Eastern state.
Part of me wanted her to come back and beat this guy now we know all his slander of her was lies and everything he accused her and her family of, he and his family are guilty of in spades.
Part of me wanted Elizabeth Warren. Early on Kamala Harris was at the top of my list. I loved her incisiveness in Senate hearings. I wanted to see a prosecuting attorney like her nail Donald Trump to the wall.
I mentioned this one day to my mother—like Hill and Liz raised Republican but a Democrat for decades—and was taken aback by her emphatic response. "NO! Not. Another. Woman! It's too soon! They want a man, let 'em have one. It's too important." She was nearly as emphatic it not be an African American either, "after what they did to Barack Obama."
I said they'd do that to any Democratic nominee. "They turned Carter into a dirty word. Investigated Clinton for everything they could think of only to impeach him for lying about sex. The Iraq war we ran Kerry, a war hero who quickly saw Vietnam was a mistake—precisely the man for that moment—and they swiftboat him. They threw birtherism at Obama, spent eight years trying to make him a one-term president and hobble our recovery.
I picked Pete. She wouldn't choose. "I'll vote whoever it is, I don't care. I just want it to be over."
1
The nations with the most Muslims- Indonesia, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh- had/ have female heads of state/government.
The nations with the most English language speaking people Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom have all had female heads of state/government.
The most populous countries in South America and Europe- Brazil and Germany - have had female heads of state/government. The African nation with the closest historical ties to America Liberia has had a female head of government/ state. So has America's closest Middle East ally Israel.
American women have had the right to vote for about a century. And they have been free from state sanctioned legislative discrimination in every phase of civic educational secular life for nearly 60 years.
Unless and until the Equal Rights Amendment is enacted American women will not be as divinely naturally created equal persons with certain unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in every phase of civil secular life as any man in our Constitutional republic.
The fact that no one knew nor cared who any of the female candidates in this Democratic Party 2020 primary campaign were married to or who their daddy was represented some significant level of independence.
The New York Times hedged it's Editorial Board endorsements and went with Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren who didn't finish 1st or 2nd anywhere.
2
As an early Warren fan, I too am disappointed. But the fact is she just kept painting herself into too many corners. It seemed she didn't understand at all that "plans" are fine, but what is your vision.
She made many dumb decisions. The DNA test, M4A... then a flip, a whole debate attacking Bloomberg instead of articulating how her ideas would help disenfranchised Americans, etc... She seemed to have no grasp of electoral politics.
I don't like Bernie, but I understand what he's about and what he wants to do. Warren, sorry I have a life, I can't go digging through a plan.
Sad really, she's smart and the country would be better with her ideas in place. But, she blew it.
I hate to tell you this, Ms. Cottle. Straight white people are the majority in this country. I want the best person, regardless of ethnicity or gender; unfortunately, the candidate I wanted, Amy Klobucher, is done. The only POTUS I've ever voted FOR in 40 years, as opposed to against, was President Obama in 2012. Having said that, I'm sick of "straight white man" being used as an negative, which is how I believe that you meant it.
Get over yourself.
2
C'mon! The Democratic Party nominated a woman candidate last time around. More than 75% of women in Warren's home state of Massachusetts voted for a male candidate. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/03/us/elections/exit-polls-massachusetts-primary.html If Warren's downfall could be attributed to sexism, this wouldn't be the case.
2
The sexism is so deeply ingrained that you can't bring yourself to call it a "two-person" race. Wow.
1
This comment thread is the perfect illustration of misogyny your readers don’t know they have and/or don’t even bother to conceal. How will we ever elect a woman POTUS with the best-read Americans still stricken with this disease?
Your explanation and that of Nate Silver at the end of the article on why women don't vote in the end for women candidates is poorly reasoned for someone like Warren. She was NOT "professorial," as you claim; like Sanders, she was just another bloviating windbag with an opinion of herself that didn't match the reality of her few real achievements or promise. The vast, overwhelming majority of female voters did not vote for Warren. You can't ratiocinate your way out of that one. Like me, another "old guy," this was just another "old lady" whom voters didn't really want. Please quit playing the "gender card" every time your hand doesn't succeed.
1
Why act like Biden and Bernie are the same when Bernie would be our first Jewish President? Wouldn’t that be a big deal?
As to HRC a war monger is a war monger regardless of gender.
Look for Joe selecting Amy for his VP.
Of course sexism is more acceptable than racism in disqualifying political candidates. In 2015, rapper T. I. stated “Not to be sexist but, I can’t vote for the leader of the free world to be a woman. Just because, every other position that exists, I think a woman could do well. But the president? It’s kinda like, I just know that women make rash decisions emotionally." Afterwards, he went on to be cast in Hollywood A list films such as Ant-Man and the Wasp and Dolemite Is My Name.
Imagine a white female actor saying "Not to be racist but, I can’t vote for the leader of the free world to be a black. Just because, every other position that exists, I think a black could do well. But the president? It’s kinda like, I just know that blacks make rash decisions aggressively."
She'd never work again.
Male supremacy is alive and well in the U.S. of A.
1
I'll take the schoolmarm over the old geezer any time
1
I'm sort of tired of political pundits and newspapers "deciding" that a candidacy is "over" or "done" or "unstoppable." You guys weren't right in 2016 and you haven't been right in 2020. Why don't you stop with the adjectives already and just report the facts?
Of course sexism is more acceptable than racism in disqualifying political candidates. In 2015, rapper T. I. stated “Not to be sexist but, I can’t vote for the leader of the free world to be a woman. Just because, every other position that exists, I think a woman could do well. But the president? It’s kinda like, I just know that women make rash decisions emotionally." Afterwards, he went on to be cast in Hollywood A list films such as Ant-Man and the Wasp and Dolemite Is My Name.
Imagine a white female actor saying "Not to be racist but, I can’t vote for the leader of the free world to be a black. Just because, every other position that exists, I think a black could do well. But the president? It’s kinda like, I just know that blacks make rash decisions aggressively."
She'd never work again.
Male supremacy is alive and well in the U.S. of A.
Looks like she is going to pull a Hillary and spend the next four years blaming everyone else for her loss.
Too much is at stake for you to be overly concerned with diversity of the presidential field this election, America. You better be ready to make sacrifices and cultivate a sense of humility about things or you're in for another four years of your current Clown-in-Chief. And as always, it'll be the poor folks, the immigrants, the children, the people of color who suffer for your pride. Come together as Americans first and foremost and not partitioned cults or suffer the consequences. Again.
You can still vote for a woman ladies... Tulsi Gabbard is still in the race.
The democrats failed to put forward a valid candidate for President. The whole campaign was designed around cable news and monotonous debates that accomplished nothing but endless stupid punditry. I think we should have a do over and pick a relevant candidate. The electorate is not inspired by the candidates left standing.
It is often pointed out that there are only white males in President Trump’s cabinet and it was even brought up last week that there is a lack of diversity in the task force created to address the coronavirus. If I didn’t know any better I would say it was a Democratic administration with all those “ old white guys!”
Dems are so quick to point out lack of diversity and “racism.” Looks like the actual racists are the Dem voters. After all, they can only blame themselves- cant blame Trump, although I’m sure they are going to.
The 2020 Democratic Party candidates prove that women are just as unimpressive as men.
The very unsophisticated United States is still not ready to put a uterus in the White House.
Misogyny is very powerful, and very invasive.
1
Let it go.
No one from MA does well nationally - Romney, Kerry, Dukakis, Tsongas, Cabot Lodge. The Bay State pushes out dud after dud.
She got upset in her homestate. She is an elite Ivory tower, as NYT mentioned, 'wine tasting' candidate. Educated liberal women loved her. This is literally core NYT audience, so you'll get skew in terms of the comments.
Warren had Clinton 2.0 vibes.
People didn't see her as a folksy person. She ate chicken with a fork and knife in South Carolina, talked about 'cracking a cold beer' and oddly drinking it. She is a Boston intellectual elite, that's all. That is a fabulous thing in the Northeast, but no one outside the Northeast seemingly cares.
But, blame it on her sex. It's the 'easy' excuse.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/04/donald-trump-elizabeth-warren-very-selfish-for-not-endorsing-bernie-sanders/
“…Trump said that if Warren had dropped out, Sanders could have won in states such as Massachusetts, Texas, and Minnesota…
“…She was really a spoiler,” he said adding, “I think there’s a lot of bad blood there…
Just one question:
If a fake news outlet quotes a fake president – does the truth then spill out???
So much for the NYT "choice" of candidates. Your daily coverage of the "news" is so odd that I am unsurprised by your failure to predict or influence the results.
I wouldn't have called it a good run.
If Biden doesn't choose a woman for vice-president, I will have a hard time dealing with it. In fact, to choose Warren would make the most sense from the point of view of competence and electability. Concentrating on the Senate is probably most important right now for Dems though.
1
I would select a women from a red state that is possible to flip to blue. Texas has some great women.
@Areader Veeps haven't really shown much power to help presidential candidates to be honest. My daughter says it has to be a black woman. Maybe so. Or a Latina.
Well said. Can't add anything further. Just wondering, what's with the U.S. as most democratically elected governments have already had women leaders and it doesn't seem to be a big deal?
1
You can’t just be different you have to appeal to a broad spectrum of the electorate. The women running in this primary season did not gain enough support. Hillary is not president because the system failed not because she did. Russian intervention, Fox News mistruths and a con man with a great deal of help from the Electoral College failed all of us. 3 million votes should have been enough to win the presidency.
1
This 75 year old white straight male is looking forward to a Biden-Klobuchar or Biden-Warren ticket.
3
Sorry, but this is existential. Blame all the white ladies who voted for Trump last time.
2
At Jennifer Finney Boylan: "Bernie Angry. Bernie Smash!"
Taunting Bernie supporters is not only bad sportsmanship, it's politically reckless, considering the dangerous person currently in the whitehouse.
Warren fails at a campaign.... everyone in the media and on the Left... "IT WAS SEXISM!!!" The amount of projection in such a one dimensional accusation is mind blowing.
2
What is this nonsense? Tulsi Gabbard is going to win this whole thing.
1
Kamala Harris for VP!
I don't believe that the US has progressed far enough to elect a woman to the office of president. Liberals in the US just don't seem able to grasp what a backward and conservative nation this really is.
Sure, a creepy, mentally disturbed, uninformed, sexual predator out for just his own personal gain, why not? But a woman? No way! That is something that happens in a civilized, advanced nation not in a country as unenlightened as the US.
3
Actually, American voters did elect a woman president, by nearly 3 million votes. It was only due to the quirkiness of the Electoral College that she didn’t win. But, hey, the Constitution is the rules we live by, and Clinton’s campaign apparently allocated resources in ways that ultimately didn’t allow her to win the prize.
As the piece points out, Obama was a “rare political talent,” and rare by definition means individuals like him don’t come along frequently. Clinton is clearly a more mundane talent, though she certainly possesses plenty of the qualifications to be President. It is a tough world, and getting elected President is among the toughest of tasks.
I do not believe that we should approach election to this highest office within an affirmative action framework. We should, in a perfect world, elect the best candidate. However, the qualifiers determining suitability to that rank are numerous, and often largely subjective. It is a dangerous path to suggest that we should elect someone because of their gender, or their ethnicity, or (and given the behavior of R’s lately this one is more tenuous) their party. Winning an election is a collective affirmation by the voters of the qualities of a particular candidate. It seems critical to me that we avoid limiting who is qualified to receive that affirmation by what are essentially surface level labels. Women will get better at running for President, and at some point, we’ll elect one.
How Amy Klobuchar Treats Her Staff https://nyti.ms/2Vde2zd
HRC's campaign was a train wreck from the get go. The hubris was astounding, while the Repubs had gone fully digital her campaign was using fountain pens. She never went to the Rust Belt which cost her the election, she really acted like this was her presidency and should just be handed to her. 2016 was the best chance for a woman to take the presidency but elections are also meritocracies and the HRC campaign was just not worthy. I'm sure that the fact that they were running against an idiot and a fool gave them false hope but they didn't take him seriously and they, and people wanting a woman president, paid the price.
1
The most recent Democrat candidate was a woman. The most recent Democrat president was black. Can people PLEASE stop blaming EVERYTHING on sexism and racism?
3
Frankly as a democrat I am sick and tired of this line by the NY time that we should elect a candidate because she is a woman. Democrats nominated a black man and a woman in the past few elections. And I note there is no mention in the NY times about electing a gay politician.
We should elect the best candidate regardless of their ethnic origin, sex, or sexuality.
4
Liz for Biden’s VP. Next time, perhaps, Liz. You need some time in the executive branch. Move the country leftward carefully, and let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.
1
A highly qualified and competent woman who set up an entire federal agency from scratch fails to reach viability in many states while a border line senile white man who can barely finish a sentence without confusing himself and his entire policy plank can be summarized in one word "Obama", wins the most delegates.
No wonder Trump is the Prez. of America.
1
Oh, boo hoo. You don't win just because you're a woman. You need policy positions that resonate across the aisle and you need charisma, neither of which Warren had.
2
Maybe Next Time Ladies
Nancy Pelosi for president in 2024!
1
I assume Ms. Cottle wrote the title to this piece and that she was attempting irony in tone; however, she missed. Badly. This "lady" was not amused.
1
This take is so tragically lame. For many reasons but mainly;
-this is the first time since 2004 the Democratic party has nominated a white male.
-the Democratic Party is 55% women. This isn’t some patriarchal conspiracy it’s what you chose.
Stop whining and be better.
2
What a surprise. Another article bemoaning the racism and sexism of the United States by focusing on race and sex.
There are vastly more important aspects of diversity than melanin and genitalia.
2
"So much for the most diverse presidential field in history."
HUH?
By definition it must ultimately come down to one person. It can't remain "diverse" forever!
Who writes this P.C. dribble?
1
Locked Out of the Running
No woman for pres this time around,
None made the cut – our men let them down
Something is rotten in our polity –
It’s not in our gender, contractually;
We hector, we frown, with face work a crutch
But not like Joe Biden, whose teeth are too much;
Too nice like Amy, or too nasty like Liz –
Bottom line, sisters, their champagne lacked fizz.
We're not "ladies". We're women and you calling us "ladies" is proof you had a hand in this!
2
"Let us state that Mr. Biden and Mr. Sanders have many fine qualities." - immediately after damning both of them with ageist, racist and sexist put downs. Classy, Michelle.
2
That's right ladies.
In 2024 we'll have the first woman of color winning the White House and #WomenPOTUS will rule the world.
And I don't want to hear anyone of the NYT faithful complaining that it's Nikki Haley.
What an insulting, condescending, patronizing lead about female presidential candidates written, of course, by a woman. Meow back, Gurl!
3
Warren is overrated.
2
“Maybe Next Time, Ladies”?
Thanks for the condescending, tone deaf headline, NYT. Gee, I wonder how sexist assumptions keep hobbling capable women?
2
Please not "Madam President"
Please address our first female US President as "Ms. President"
Thanks!
This country is pathetic. Every first-world country has had a female leader at one time or another, and this country just can't seem to get it together. It's a depressing time to be a woman.
1
What a dumb title for an op-ed- 'Maybe next time ladies?" did you forget about Hillary winning nomination in 2016. Maybe next time for a jewish, black or gay man or woman, but to say next time ladies- it's false flag.
If people- men and women in the democratic party- would have put aside squabbles from within, as well as the milenials, gen x and z'ers, HRC not only should've been president, but would've been. Maybe next time- "Dems won't be their own worst enemy" would be better op-ed title.
1
And what role did Michelle Cottle play?
I am trying to find where Michelle Cottle came out strongly for one of the women.
Or she is one of these columnists that find fault with everything.
1
Well, boo-hoo! What a bunch of whining. The big bad (white) men brought Warren down. No! The VOTERS did. Many who were put off by Warren were women. What you want are YOUR women to win: White, clerisy, woke, wonkish, in your face lecturers. She lost. Get over it.
3
As I write this, the lead New York Times headline is "2-Man Race as Bloomberg Exits and Endorses Biden." Ah, yes, the exalted "2-man race" we've all be salivating over, mano-a-mano like it's supposed to be in America. Liz Warren is still in the race but does not fit the paradigm so we want her to fade back into the woodwork with her "scolding teacher" demeanor. The kind of woman we want to see right now is Jill Biden bodily protecting her man, just like Hillary Clinton on January 26, 1992. Plus ça change . . .
The NYT digital edition currently has a headline “Two-man race as Bloomberg exits and endorses Biden”. At first, I thought I had missed some news and Warren (and Gabbard) were no longer in the race. But no, it was just the headline writer implying the women in the race (one of whom should be a formidable candidate) don’t count. Clearly, the odds are very long for Warren now, but as long as she is in the race, she is in the race (endorsed by the NYT no less!) and your editors should take care with the words they use!
she lost...karma...
At least Elizabeth warren isn't senile like the current Democrat Frontrunner who is also a closet Republican -- Obamacare, Romneycare my foot, messesin Libya and Syria, Guantanamo still open.
I thought she was adorable despite her missteps -- SMART -- thoughtful armed with research.
What do Americans expect in a female candidate -- Scarlett Johannsen? And for the press to call her school marmish and to not call Biden senile and a proven Republican is hypocrisy. But there's a lot of that as well as an inability to tell the truth.
Kamal Harris is a bad, mean woman. Amy Klobuchar for me was pedantic (beyond schoolmarmish) .
I am disappointed with my fellow American women who went for the boyz and not the girl. They certainly cannot in good faith call themselves feminists. SHAME on the women of America who have thus far voted in the primaries.. or did they drink the Biden koolaid being spread by the media. Here we go again... no RESPECT for anything tht is not predatory capitalism.. In the pockets of the CEOs who decided China would be where everything would be produced including drugs. SHAME.
"The Democratic race has come down to this: two straight white septuagenarian men fighting over the soul of the party..."
This was the mentality that got the Hillary nominated, the foundation of the Chief Executive Clown's victory: "not female, not good."
Sincerely, your fellow Warren supporter, Qxt63.
1
This country is far too misogynistic to vote for a woman president. They would rather nominate an old man or two who bumble along. Yes, we are pathetic!
2
Great article, horrible headline
I want her to be my president! She’s thorough, hard working, detail oriented, determined but flexible and a technocrat. In other words, Americans are too stupid to vote for this person.
1
Warren has often been a better public servant than a politician, more candid than savvy. Her biggest mistake this time around may have been embracing policy that defied practicality and then (unlike Sanders, whose empty platitudes and overblown rhetoric can give good ideas a bad name) explaining how to pay for it. She has already helped Biden a great deal by engineering Bloomberg's demise. I guess it is too much to hope that she would go the whole way and endorse him now — but wouldn't Biden-Warren be a dream ticket?
2
Understood you/NYT must be very upset and embarrassed about your completely sexist female double endorsement. Maybe identity politics sells papers but it doesn't fool voters, who have had enough. That's the reality.
2
Can we talk about Warren for a second? My mother, who was staunchly pro-Clinton, thought Warren was too "whiny" to win-- this from a woman who has long wanted a female president.
I actually thought Warren was the smartest candidate on the stage. But the fact that Trump has frequently managed to come out on top whenever he and Warren had a public scuffle-- Pocahontas anybody?-- gave me concerns about her ability to not-- to put it bluntly-- be torn apart by Trump in the general election.
The consolation prize here is that she is still in the Senate, and still giving the fat cats hell.
3
Does the NYT realize how condescending this headline is?
10
The easy answer is misogyny all around. White men (and some women), African-American men, Latinos and most other cultures. It is really sad to say, but the US has become one of the most backward, intolerant and ignorant country in a supposed civilized world. Very ashamed to be a citizen of such a barbaric and willfully
stupid nation.
7
Warren had serious credibility issues and it had nothing to do with her vagina. The native American thi g is pretty hard for pt of people to look past, then her doubling down with the native American family recipes. Also, she was a huge republican not long ago.
I don't doubt that she's seen the light and wants to help working class people, and I take her seriously, but not too seriously. She's like the low key Rachel Dolezal of politics. Seriously, what is wrong with the world when woke liberals are fighting to elect a white woman who took an opportunity from a native to advance her career. Feels like the twilight zone.
1
Klobuchar was the best candidate this year. To your point, she was savaged at the starting gate for being a tough boss. What kind of a boss is Trump?
Klobuchar's last gesture - withdrawing; flying to Dallas; just-in-time stumping for Joe- proved her worth. No poor me sulking. Size up the situation, be decisive and get the job done.
When the glass ceiling gets broken, she is the type of person who will break it. She doesn't "poor little me" (like Hillary, the Goldman Sachs schmoozer). She doesn't trade on her gender (Gillebrand; Harris). She just kicks butt and gets the job done. Hopefully she will be Joe's v.p. and heir apparent.
4
It's the height of hypocrisy to assert the selection of Sanders and Biden is somehow sexist. A vagina litmus test is as harmful to great government as is the reverse. These two humans won because the voters want them not because of their testicles.
1
It's all fear of Trump. Trump has sucked up all the political oxygen and there's none left for real political discussion.
3
Supported Warren and my 5-yr old daughter saw me looking at her speech Tuesday -- it was live on CNN -- and she was like "Who is that Daddy?" Said it was someone running for President that I support. She said,
"But, she's a woman. She can't be President All the other Presidents were men."
It broke my heart. Told her that no law exists against it and that someday it could happen. Even said that HRC got more votes than 45 but due to a weird quirk in our system where some people's votes count more (small state citizens) -- she lost -- but not that point was appreciated. :)
****It's been said in other places BUT:
-Biden's Mandela lie, his treatment of women, his "jail em and ask questions later" tough on crime stances, his family's influential positions -- likely would have been and should have been huger deals -- Warren's error regarding her Native American heritage (inappropriate but not technically inaccurate) tore her apart.
-----Warren's brief lead in the polls caused the entire media establishment to dissect mercilessly her M4A plan. Sanders never got that level of scrutiny and he was more rigid about it.
At any rate...She had her negatives too which the unforgiving part of the progressive wing of the party couldn't get over (her initial conservatism as a young adult, her corporate client representation)...but will remember her eloquence and intelligence.
79
@Cool Dude anatomy is destiny
1
@Cool Dude
She simply lacked the gravitas in appearance and bearing.
The wild gesticulating, the slight build, the overall shrillness. None of that means she couldn't have been a good president.
@COMMENTOR
Ah, yes: "shrillness". Have you ever described a man that way, no matter how high-pitched his voice, no matter how strident? Teddy Roosevelt wouldn't have met your criteria. He was well-known for having a high-pitched voice and the few extant wax cylinder recordings of his speaking confirm it.
"Wild gesticulating"? Really? Like Michelle said, ever watched Bernie Sanders? Or Drumpf, who could probably run the sound system at his rallies just using the energy from his flailing arms?
"Slight build" negates gravitas, so a big build must indicate it, yes? You mean like the obese, blathering homunculus currently occupying the White House? More gravy than gravitas.
Seriously, as a man, I'm getting pretty fed up with the tone-deafness of my fellow "guys".
26
Michelle Cottle - it is not 'next time'; it is 'ANY TIME' a candidate makes it feasible to take us forward.
Why Pete Buttigieg is such a phenomenon with Americans? The person did not make any fuss about the identity.....
I think Americans have traveled a lot in keeping aside gender biases about our political leaders.
We will get a female political leader (Nancy Pelosi is already there as a leader of some real power) as our president soon.
But the question is, would you believe in 'decency' of your fellow American Male Voters?
Please, consider; I am requesting as a male American voter.
First step in growth is to own up to your mistakes.
This is not what I see here in the comment thread by all the aggrieved female supporters of Sen. Warren.
Instead of genuine self-reflection (as to why her campaign fizzled), what I see is a grating and overflowing sense of entitlement to the highest political office in the land because of some nonsensical notion of "it's about time America elected a female President" (what does that even mean honestly?).
Sen. Warren's message didn't resonate with Democratic voters who BTW are predominantly Women and POC.
So blame Women and POC for her loss if you must, at least it's based on facts because blaming American men and their avowed and raging sexism for her downfall is downright preposterous.
It's no less ridiculous than Sen. Warren claiming to be of Native American ancestry.
Yes, it is time for a woman to be President of the USA. Nikki Haley is that woman. I hope she gets that opportunity in 2024.
There were women candidates who went through a defined process and the public found them wanting compared to the old white guys. Perhaps rather than focusing on the age and race, you might consider the experience and accomplishments of the old white guys and replicate that in women candidates. Naming Amy as VP would be a good start.
Rarely does a day go by that I do not think about how much better off the country (and my mental state) would be right now if HRC was President. No doubt I'll be thinking the same about Elizabeth Warren beginning in 2021: two smart, collaborative, and competent women who would have been stellar leaders for the nation at home and abroad.
3
Mr. Emoluments & his grifters have to go. Democrats face a stark choice: Come together to beat Donald Trump or surrender to authoritarianism.
Cannabalism & puritanicalism fed by Russian & Trumpublican trolls will re-elect Trump.
In 2016 Bernie & his bros whined about superdelegates until primary losses convinced them that superdelegates were his only path to nomination. After, he negotiated Dem nomination rule changes to diminish the influence of superdelegates. Before Super Tuesday Bernie & his bros insisted, against the rules that he negotiated, that a plurality of the delegates would entitle him to the nomination on the 1st round. As he loses, primaries, & falls further behind Biden, he & his bros will flip again.
There are no saints. Compared to Mr. Emoluments & his grifters, Joe Biden & moderate Dems are a social justice giants.
Moderate and progressive Democrats must find a way to build a governing coalition together, or surrender to authoritarianism.
Could Nancy Pelosi step in at the convention? She certainly is very highly qualified. I would vote for her in a heartbeat.
1
You can’t on the one hand say that we shouldn’t judge people based on their gander, race, ethnicity, etc., and then get all upset about the (any of the above) of the person who wins. Just as I doubt any Biden or Sanders voter thought, “you know, I think I’ll go for a white guy”, I doubt any voter decided “I won’t vote for her because she’s a woman”. You can’t have it both ways. Harris ran a substance-free campaign, Warren has the scold face of an assistant principle, and Klobuchar was uninspiring.
We collectively apologize for the two best candidates emerging rather than whatever minority makeup you’d prefer than to have.
i wanted Bernie to win but i voted for Warren. Why? Because I want to see a woman in office. I want to see the change the world needs, and if it takes a woman then so be it! I've spent years and years in school reading about all the mishaps caused at the hands of men. The only mishap I've read about women was the story of Adam and Eve, and we're still judged like that happened yesterday.
no, i'm not into misandry. i'm into REAL CHANGE. and if Americans are too scared of it, then they don't deserve it.
Women need to stop complaining about old white guys winning in the primaries.
If women candidates want to be President, they need to earn more votes than their competitors.
Warren, Harris, Klobuchar, Gabbard, and Gillibrand failed to garner the votes, as did most of the male candidates. Nothing else matters.
The Presidential election is not 5 year old Tee Ball: not everyone gets a trophy.
Get more votes than the others in the race and you will be President. It is as simple as that.
If you don’t have the votes, you have no basis to complain.
1
There will be a female president in four, possibly two, years. And a female VP in a few more months. Here is how.
If Biden wins the nomination, he goes with a female VP (probably Klobuchar).
So, first, there is your female VP, if they win. Then, in four years, Biden will be too old to run again, and Klobuchar will be the nominee for the Democrats.
Now Trump. He will dump Pence soon -- he's got the Christian vote, does not need Pence. He will pick Nikki Haley (former Governor so she can manage, and interface to the UN so she can negotiate; and she brings the women's vote.)
Now if they win, there is your female VP.
In four years, Trump cannot run again, so Haley will be the female nominee for the Republicans.
One women from the Democrats and one from the Republicans. And there is your female president.
And two years?
If Biden wins with Klobuchar, I even predict he might step down to "get the ball rolling," so to speak.
Of course, this all assumes we're not all dead from COVID-19.
1
It's the charisma baby. Bernie's got it, Joe has a little (very little) but the women in the race had none. Ditto HRC. Charisma counts. Likeability counts. HRC wasn't likeable. Warren is even worse. Amy was sort of wallpaper. Trump has more charisma and likeability than all the dem candidates, male and female, combined. JFK had it, Reagan had it, Clinton had it, Bush 43 had enough of it, Obama had a lot of it -- you think voters care about policy positions? A little. But they want a leader, not some policy wonk. They want someone who can get things done, not talk about it.
Charisma doesn't always translate to good leadership, but it helps.
Bloomberg has no charisma. Zip. Zero. And his trying to frame the president's job as a management job, he lost it right there. Sure, leaders have to manage, but management isn't leadership. And that's what the people want. Leadership. And charisma is critical to that. When the dems run women candidates who have charisma, you'll see them get the nomination. Nikki Haley has charisma by the way. Look out for her in 2024. Oh, you don't want one of those kind of women as president, you want a right thinking leftie don't you. So you better find a candidate with charisma or you're doomed.
1
Watch this space. Watch all the respondents (predominantly male) bash Warren's campaign. Bashing the campaign is a great out for not having to support a woman.
Warren is intelligent and talented. She is focused and passionate. She had more ideas and more energy that either of the old white men we will now have to choose between. And no one cares that Biden is running a "bad campaign" - now do they?
2
Other than Warren, the other women were backward looking or playing to pollsters than the country. If your are worried about oldsters, what we need is a younger progressive, male or female who will work for the working and middle classes. Whether we like it or not that's where the votes are. If you upset enough of them you get a living nightmare, Donald J. Trump in the White House.
I would have happily voted for Warren, in fact had a bet on her with my friends, until she stumbled. The other women close to the end, Klobuchar and Harris were either too center right or self serving.
I voted for Bernie in the primaries, but will vote for Biden if he's the nominee but suspect Biden is going to succumb to Trump's egregious and unfair hits on him. I am not sure Biden's all there.
Never mind that Trump is senile but he's just an evil troll in human flesh and will use any weapon he can find.
Let's face reality - any female running for President would lose to a deceased white male in the US.
However, also remember that Hillary, the most qualified candidate ever to run for the Presidency, lost to Putin, WikiLeaks, Cambridge Analytica, foreign-sponsored social media ads, James Comey and twenty-four years of right wing conservative propaganda in the form of Rush Limbaugh and literally fake Fox News.
It should be a leadership qualifications contest, but white males have turned it into a popularity contest for the Old Boy Network.
Until the US evolves, we will continue to waste 50% of the talent, creativity and intellectual ability our schools and culture produce.
4
Sexism and perceived electability is definitely a huge problem for female candidates, including Warren. It is so difficult for women to portray themselves as credible leaders because they do not fit the template of what we think leadership looks like. They are automatically assumed to be “too weak” and incompetent and yet when they are too strong and too well qualified they suddenly become distasteful, shrill, untrustworthy and too aggressive. Men on the other hand don’t have to walk this minefield - they are automatically assumed to be competent and trustworthy and really have to tank in a very major way to lose that gloss. Unfortunately, sexism is so entrenched that women have the same unconscious biases. Also, I think that voters think that with Warren they can have their cake and eat it too. They assume she is still interested enough in politics and public life that they can vote for a less risky male, but still get the benefit of her technical expertise and policy ideas. And of course, a male will then get the credit - reinforcing the idea that men are more competent leaders.
2
Corporations, colleges, etc. have been discriminating in favor of women for decades, often through ideological hostility to men - even when feminist contempt for honesty and fairness through due process somehow winds up destroying disproportionally high numbers of African-American young men in campus sexual assault allegations. The US is one of the most rabidly feminist nations on the planet. This is true in terms of the public atmosphere, as well. Malicious and dishonest over-generalizations about men - hate speech, in the context of claims about any other group of people - are greeted with enthusiastic approval. Generalize about women, and it better be obsequiously positive, or it's your job. Andrew Yang's bit of cynical crowd-appeal about men getting "a little moronic" in groups couldn't have evaded condemnation if said about most anyone other than men or boys. The other negative commentary our society approves of is towards feminine girls, who might tend to commit the unforgiveable sin of admiring their boyfriends, thinking they have positive human qualities, and aren't a disgrace to the species, and thus such girls have to be dismissed by our society as "plastics" in the sense of movies like "Mean Girls". Actual fair-mindedness has always been a problem for feminism. Feminists have invested in stereotypes, and in culture war, just like Trump. I like Warren's focus on issues of debt and anti-corruption. Pity she took PAC money - and people don't trust Cambridge elitists.
The problem is not that women make 'mistakes', but that they apologize. Warren's answer to mayor Pete's question about her healthcare plan should have been, "you want to know what my plan is, look at my decades of experience in medical bankruptcies. What plan you got, btw? You don't have decades of experience doing anything". Her answer to Biden's critiques of her should have been, "atleast I'm not Mastercard senator". Attack, redirect, put enemy on defensive. However in town halls and campaign rallies, when talking to people, be yourself and talk about your true plans. That two pronged strategy worked for Obama in the primaries against Clinton.
It maybe worth remembering Trump, Berine, and Biden all failed to secure nomination in the first try as well.
What I find most disheartening is that if a fraction of the tweet blasts authored by Donald Trump as President of the United States had been made by a woman in the same capacity, she would have been impeached in a bi-partisan vote in a nano-second!
3
Klobuchar was very wrong in her jealous, bigoted, and ill-conceived dismissal of Pete's resume. They were both running for President, an executive position, and his executive experience as a mayor is far more relevant than hers as a Senator. The times I saw both of them speak, he was also more intelligent, more thoughtful, more charismatic, and better natured than her. Plus he brings additional positive life experience like being a veteran. She brings a history of being an abusive boss to her staff, and baggage from some prosecutorial lowlights. She has indeed been an active Senator, but it's a different branch of government with different skill set. Success there does not say much about aptitude for President. I would not be surprised if Biden wins the Democratic nomination and chooses her as a running mate as a way of pandering to the female voter. But others would be better for the job, including Pete. He did better than her in the primaries on merit, not sexism as she claims. She was the sexist, with the ridiculous claim that people should vote for her or Warren because they were women who had never previously lost an election. Stated in real time as they were both losing primary after primary to the men she demanded we not vote for because they were men.
Excellent article. Yes indeed "a head-spinner after the Biden blowout in South Carolina, Super Tuesday voters decided to shake things up."
What's mind boggling is - when will America elect a woman Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidate to lead our nation?
Geraldine Ferraro, Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin - now Kamala Harris, Amy Kloubcher, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren (who most likely will drop out soon) rejected by voters.
There's not only what gives the appearance that it was men who marched to the voting polls like they did in 2016 to vote for Hillary's opponent & send him to THE WHITE HOUSE but women also followed in their foot-steps in 2016 and blew a golden opportunity.
So, like Michelle Cottle stated the bottom line is "the next few months as we’re watching two old guys fight for the privilege of taking on another old guy in November.
1
I share this disappointment. I would have loved to have seen a Warren/Klobuchar ticket - or the reverse. At least one of them at the top. And under different circumstances in 2020, one of them could have won the nomination and the general election.
What makes this nomination process unique is the existence of the most horrific and despicable president in our history. And there were some pretty bad ones. Buchanan, the first Johnson, Jackson to name a few. It is a uniquely dangerous situation because the fate of the Earth itself is at stake. Biden is viewed as "low risk" and "most likely to beat". That can be debated forever.
Those enormous strides that we have made in viewing women as equals on the political stage are overshadowed by terror. Extreme fear that the Psychopath might be re-elected.
It ain't right but it's like this: we are still tribal. It's in the wee hours. The neighboring tribe will attack at dawn. Our tribe argues endlessly about who should lead our counter attack on the enemy camp. At the last minute..at first light...the tribe picks the old chief. Not because he can throw a spear the farthest. But because he knows the way to the camp.
..."As for complaints that she was too strident or shrill or hectoring or inflexible, have any of these critics seen Bernie Sanders? Come on."....
And that's exactly why I don't like EITHER of them! One comes across as a scolding principal, the other as an angry uncle. So much for the sexism card.
And please don't leave race and racism out of this. Yes misogyny and sexism are strong (even if they are *just* perceptions of "the neighbor's sexism"), but so too is the racism that the 2016 election and early democratic runs have illuminated. It's not just "two old guys" fighting to take on another "old guy" in November, it's a competition of exclusively old white dudes, and that confluence of homogeneity is the what's so dispiriting coming out of the "most diverse presidential field in history".
I voted for Elizabeth Warren in my state’s primary (I also voted for Hilary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election). I make no apologies for having endorsed an energetic, intelligent, capable, pragmatic candidate. I don’t care about her gender. I am saddened that some kind of misguided strategic voting may have killed her candidacy. I hope these “septuagenarian” white guys who are left standing have the good sense to include her in their cabinets or as a running mate. What a consolation prize, though. It really is disheartening.
1
To succeed a woman has to try twice as hard as a man. They are also judged far more harshly. Had Warren been male I suspect she would be in a different place today.
2
A woman has already won the presidency, only to lose it on a technicality.
This time the election is an aberration, something we're not likely to see, ever again. This time it isn't enough to elect the best candidate. It is to nominate someone who can beat Trump, the most egregiously unfit person to ever be nominated for, and to hold the presidency.
It's not about symbolism. It's about saving the nation and preserving the future. She/he has to win. They have to.
2
To assume sexism, whenever a woman doesn't prevail, or is criticized, is in itself sexism! Elizabeth Warren is indeed smart and has what it takes to be President! However, to be President you have to be likable to win the hearts of the people! She came across at times as petty or even dare i say annoying, which turned off a lot of people. Her confronting Bernie and accusing him of calling her a liar (over a matter that is disputed) while on stage during a debate, in full view of national media, put off a lot people. Also, even though she took down Bloomberg, deservedly so, for his treatment of women at his company, to some extent, litigating and re-litigating the same issue over and over while everyone else was ready to move on was off putting ! Having said that, she may have a chance in future!
Shame, I like Liz, and if nothing else, whoever does get the nod, should consider her for VP. That'll keep the Repubs and Wall Street up nights. Liz warren, the true economic 'General Patton' of our time, just a heartbeat away from the Presidency? That'll strike fear into the plutocrats, for sure.
1
The obvious solution is a Biden-Warren ticket.
This would make all Democratic constituencies happy: centrists, liberals, African-Americans, educated suburban women, Reagan Republicans.
And give her a shot at a second-term presidency.
1
Since day one they were against Warren.
Every news so-called expert men & especially Women were against her.
I'm so upset that it's 2020 & we are still a 3rd world country.
2
Elizabeth Warren proved herself to be mean. She should have saved her temper for trump not her fellow Democrats.
Warren had the double handicap of being a woman and being a Native American. Hard to overcome a double whammy.
I'm already putting a bumper sticker "AOC 2028" on my car.
It's ironic that any media outlet would run this story as if sympathetic to Warren's, or women's, plight here. The media did everything it could to erase Warren from the story, starting in Iowa, when Warren came in third but the media reported the two frontrunners (Sanders and Buttigieg) and then commented on Biden's fourth place, skipping right over her. They have persistently undermined her campaign, especially from the moment Biden won South Carolina, which they treated as evidence of the Second Coming and insisted that with 50+ delegates apiece, everyone but Sanders and Biden should go home, when there were still thousands of delegates to win. Friends of mine actually said to me, "Oh, too bad about Warren, guess I'll vote for Biden" based on that. I have been trying to counter that defeatism in person and online for a week, but it's hard to fight against every pundit out there. And then the NYT turns around and says what's wrong with the public? and Nate Silver, of all people, "laments" that it's a self-fulfilling prophecy? Only if YOU helped to create it, Nate, you and all the other pollsters and major news channels. Elizabeth Warren is far and away the best candidate we could have wished for in this race. And now we're stuck, again, with two old white men who have committed far more missteps in their decades-long careers than Warren ever thought of, and are once again not being held accountable. I'm so disgusted.
3
Amy Klobuchar would make a good VP. I can see Elizabeth having her own agency and maybe Andrew Yang as commerce secretary. Give me four years of boring. I go to news channels for information and not to be entertained.
1
Yet opportunity remains: Klobuchar for VP.
It’s not the sex of the candidate. Warren like HRC was unelectable. The male landscape is also littered with failures in this race. Make no mistake of it If Warren was a middle ground Democrat, it would be a three person race.
2
There's a "look" that represents power. Men have that look, woman don't. Remember Joan of Arc, that ultra-rare female leader of armies? A real French hero, Jeanne d'arc! Even so she was burned at the stake by her own king after she led his army to victory over the French. Why? Because she was viewed as a freak of nature, a devil-charged woman, a masculine female! Archetypes are almost impossible to transcend
Maybe next time, ladies indeed. Next time, promote candidates who don't constantly mislead and recast false stories about their pasts as Warren did, such as saying she left a teaching job because she lacked the necessary courses, and then changing it (at the last debate) to say the school principal dismissed her because she was pregnant. There's only so much of that stuff even her biggest supporters can stomach.
Also, maybe bring forth a higher quality female candidate, one who can defeat a 77-year-old man of apparently declining cognitive ability.
Why for instance did a qualified, well-spoken and military veteran candidate -- Tulsi Gabbard -- get cruelly dismissed by party royal Hillary Clinton as an agent of Russia. The Democrats are their own worst enemy, and get what they deserve.
As my brother in London who saw the results said - "the US has a Daddy complex'.
She failed because she made a hundred campaign mistakes and lied too many times about her personal story. She was a hypocrite when it came to big money donations (rolled her PAC filled Senate Fund into her Prez Fund) and was All Star poor candidate. Finally, the people in Massachusetts, who know her best, can’t stand her. That isn’t anti-woman. That is anti know-it-all but can’t do it all.
1
This was not the year for diversity. Diversity could never beat Trump and his xenophobic, misogynistic ilk. Let’s hope that Biden picks a young, sure-footed running mate, gets this country back on track, and paves the way for the change we all want but simply couldn’t afford in this election.
1
Blaming misogomy for individual failures of a woman is its own misogomy. Are we not capable of being wrong or bad on our own just like men?
Elizabeth Warren didn't fail because of one mistake about the cost of Medicare for All. That was simply the final period on a long simmering unease many people had been feeling for a while.
Passing yourself off as a Native American to gain unearned privileges; Repeating over and over again that she was fired because she was pregnant when her own past words and historical records prove otherwise; Falsely downgrading her father's occupation to a janitor in order to gain points such that her brother actually had to make a public statement. And my favorite: Bernie Sanders is a misogynist.
Lying is not an attractive trait in any candidate man or woman. Combine that with her declaration that she would ask a trans child to elect the Secretary of Education and it was all just too much. Yes, I know she probably said it as a show and was an off the cuff remark, but given her constant focus on gender pronouns and identity politics it was the final straw as far as I was concerned.
There is absolutely nothing that will ever make me vote, and conversely not vote, for a high office like the POTUS based on gender.
Not sure how a candidate who can't even win her home state is supposed to be a victim of sexism, but there it is.
I am appalled that the legitimate progressive media – NYTimes, Wash. Post, MSNBC, CNN - suddenly decided and projected, through their opinion writers, that Joe Biden has to be The One to represent the Democrats this November. They did the same in 2016 with Hillary. We will see if they are similarly wrong again. They seem to think that there is never an apology necessary for their smug professional opinions, and nothing they need to learn from their mistakes as they continue to wag the dog , then marvel at how the dog lost its way.
As in 2016, I will trudge to the polling place, and my left hand will force my right hand to fill in the dot for a dull establishment candidate who is well past his time.
2
It's not about diversity. It's about the best choice.
1
Hillary crushed last time, somehow Warren's campaign was even less coherent...
Patience, Ms. Cottle. One step at a time.
Just as African-Americans have a higher hurdle because they have been legally free a shorter time, women have a higher hurdle because they have been legally voting a shorter time.
Just as financial wealth is built generationally, the political power of women will be built generationally.
39
With respect to women in politics, we need to distinguish between candidates and officeholders. Hillary Clinton was a great senator and would have made a great president. But she was never the retail politician that her husband was. Same with Warren. Great senator. But all that frenetic arm-waving and aggressive interrupting during debates were off putting.
6
Elizabeth Warren (and Bernie Sanders) is a far better candidate than Biden (or Bloomberg). Biden seems the current leader because some establishment democrats endorsed him, not because he is a good candidate. He will continue to mumble and stumble, forget key things and people, make gaffes and make bad decisions (just as he has in the past). His overstuffed closet of bad legislation and trashing of Anita Hill makes him very vulnerable.
11
Warren is the best candidate. I hope she stays in. We need to see her debate Sanders and Biden so those who still have a chance to vote can see the obvious. Young people cannot sit this out.
7
When a female candidate for president is being described as “schoolmarmish”, I know the double standard for women vs men is alive and well. Think how that term sums up how we feel about women who are in control of their profession, produce results and guide the outcome. Do they command our respect or become suspect? We call them spinsters, bossy and cruel, or in Warren’s case, shrill and overreaching. One response to this opinion piece even implies that 2024 is the time for progressive female candidates to shine, because we’ll have the dirty business of getting the country back on the track finished by then. Obviously, unless our attitudes change, there will be a reason why 2024 isn’t the right time for a female president either.
19
The main reason a woman is not the nominee is the same that a young gay man, a left wing radical, a billionaire with a checkered past, and the rest. In times of crisis, we choose what we know instead of trying something new. Trump’s presidency is the main factor, not anti feminism.
5
The real problem here is America is not a democracy. I will cite three facts.
First, in democracy, the majority or its representatives govern. Twice in our recent history a presidential candidate who won the popular vote, in one case by 2.9 million votes, lost. There is no precedent for this in the world where democracy is the system of governing.
Second, California with a population of about 40 million people has the same representation, two senators, as do Wyoming and Vermont, each with a population of about 600,000. This is another blatant violation of the main tenets of democracy. Just imagine what the outcome might have been in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump had our senators were elected by a system representing each state's population.
Third, America is culturally backward, as backward as its "ally" Saudi Arabia. Americans in their hearts do not believe and accept gender equality. To address this cultural bias, we need legal remedies, a constitutional amendment or an addendum to the 19th Amendment (Women's Suffrage) mandating equal (50%) and physical representation of women in all federal, state and local elections. For example, both Democrats and Republicans must be forced legally to nominate a woman for president on a rotational basis. If a party's male nominee wins the White House twice in a row, that party's presidential nominee must be female in the next two presidential elections. How is that to kill gender bias once and for all?
11
You are right on every point you make, Michelle. Americans are more likely to chose male, gay, inexperienced mayor over a woman. Let’s hope Joe Biden has the good sense to choose one of those many fine, female presidential candidates as his VP.
8
First, while Bernie may be old, he would bring back younger people into the process. Second, I can't agree more about your comments about the electibility of women. Amy Klobuchar was right about everyone going gaga about Buttigeig. More specifically about Warren, I agree with some other commenters that she made mistakes in suddenly seeming to shift her positions, accusing Bernie of misogyny, and getting more vague and evasive in answering some questions in the earlier debates. She could not afford that, in part specifically due to the fact that the electorate is unlikely to vote in a woman. But she recovered, and she is clearly a candidate who has it all - qualifications, flexibility, empathy, and a strong progressive agenda.
3
Ms. Cottle, A woman leading our nation is exactly what our country needs. Elizabeth Warren's gender is or was her greatest obstacles.
As the population of older generations continues to dwindle and is being replaced with a generation that places gender on the back seat of any choice, this will change.
One day we will be saying , "Madam President." Of this I am certain.
6
Imagine a campaign where candidates were identified as “Candidate A, B, C” without knowing their age, sex or physical appearance. I’d be curious to know the outcome of just listening to a candidate’s ideas and potential policy plans. I’m sure there would be many that might track down the past accomplishments to ascertain the identity, but for many it may be a blind selection that would give real insight into a candidate.
7
Gender alone should not be the only consideration. I have voted for Sen Warren twice as my senator but I did not vote for her last Tuesday.
Evidently, I was not alone; her 3rd place showing has demonstrated how we from this Commonwealth are disappointed in her. She may not even get another term from me if she doesn't stop her demogoguery in the Senate.
In her ads, she tries to suggest she and President Obama were tight. No, she did not really help Mr Obama much during his presidency, never mind he was the one who elevated her profile
6
I came to the conclusion in about the third grade that I would never live to see a woman as president. I'm 52 now, and, although we've come pretty close (at least in 2016 I saw a woman elected but not win), every time I hear people discuss female candidates and hear the overwhelming double standards, my heart just sinks. More importantly, these sexist (subtle, sure, but still sexist) comments roll easily off the tongues of both men and women. I just hope that maybe my own children will one day witness what I fear I never will. Of course, it's only been 100 years since we got the vote, so . . . maybe another 50 to go?
9
Surely the preferred approach is to pick the best candidate. In '16, that was indeed a woman. In '08, an African-American man (who went on to become a phenomenal and widely-adored, sorely-missed President). This labelling for the sake of it starts to get really tiresome after a while and is not particularly constructive.
4
Despite all these comments of mostly negativity, I believe that Hillary was the best possible female nominee ever
for President. She possesses knowledge of how to work the system from the inside out, and yet, she was denied the chance by the Berners, Jill Stein, and the stay at home non-voters. Even though we have lost all the women as Presidential candidates, let's get a VP in there who can pick up the 2nd term.
12
Would this article have been similar if it was about Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman back in the day? Um, no.
Then it would have been a self congratulatory piece on how " right" is more important than gender. Gender isnt the issue here, its party loyalty first, then gender is just a cudgel. Examples exist in Tn, iowa, mississippi, alabama and several other places where right wing females support regressive views and they do so not because they are women, but because they are regressive.
5
The unconscious biases need to be driven out of people's heads that America is not ready for a woman as a president. It is evident that corporate America plays a huge role in selling the candidates to the people, and it all gears today who is to make favorable decisions for them policywise to keep generating wealth for them. For there to be a madam president, the civil society is ought to rise and wake the general population up to a reality that the presidency is not about gender, rather it is all about capabilities. We believe that women can do it better relative to men.
3
What is missing in the discussion is the misogyny at the heart of the political party apparatus--both Dem and Republican. The same people who directed Clinton's losing campaign in 2016 find it impossible to imagine directing a campaign for anyone other than Biden. The same people who created the fiasco in Iowa claim to know who is electable. They have the press contacts both on and off line, they set the rumours, they shape the polls and they have not, do not and probably do not have the bandwidth to support a woman candidate in a way the works for a WOMAN candidate.
6
You left out the pundits. The pundits and the party folks you mentioned have been hammering Biden into us as the ONLY hope against Trump for many long months, as if they know. They made that assumption (and preference) on Day 1, and they played on our paralyzing fear of 4 more years. We the voters keep falling for this gaslighting which gave us Trump in the first place.
We had a once in a lifetime opportunity to choose the candidate we wanted, the one who excited us, one that could inspire us to both greater heights and actual change. Instead, we’ll have Biden, if we’re lucky. After a lifetime of public service and political involvement, I’ve been watching the dream of America die at the hands of the Republicans but with the able assist of the Democratic Party. It is now uncivilized, and I don’t see a fix. We missed our one shot. It will get a lot worse if it ever gets better.
4
It's hard to see a bright side. 2024 is an even more sad scenario. If we're waiting for that, we're hoping Trump wins and allows future elections (maybe Ivanka is coronated?), or something happens to Bernie/Biden, causing them not to run for reelection.
This is more than a setback. It's a time to autopsy our elections. If most want a woman but get Biden, the service is broken. If most want affordable, quality healthcare and our only proposal is an underfunded ACA/public option, the service is broken. If, despite our founding documents, we can't tell anyone but young boys that they have a real chance of being president, we're not a republic or a democracy, we're a boys club.
Lessons going forward - we need ranked-choice voting and primaries. We need public funding for candidates. We need a democratic primary process. We need to abolish the electoral college, as soon as possible. The ladies were great, our electoral institutions failed them.
Unfortunately, structural reform requires structural reform, and we rejected both that chicken and its egg. It's a hard road ahead. But if we vote, our expectations are low enough, and we are very patient, maybe we can take baby steps down that road together after November. It's almost a start.
7
Yes to all you’ve said here. I’d add only that it’s time to invite multiple parties to the, um, party. The ones we have seem to work against us and deliver us nominees we the voters would never have chosen in a straight up, everybody votes a primary on the same day, one person one vote sort of way. And once we get their preferred, silly, uninspired corporate shill elected, Congress will merely argue and accuse and sit in paralysis until we do this all over again.
Multiple parties would give expression to lots of different views on lots of different issues, not just the whitewashed (pun intended), preapproved ones we get from these bland party folks. In Congress, members would have to build a different coalition for different votes, and things might actually get done.
We need real solutions, and we need them fast because this country is at a critical point in its development. We must choose whether to evolve or devolve. I don’t love our chances of choosing correctly.
1
To preface, I am a young male, currently in college.
All the vocal women I know in my peer group, being late high school and college age, do not see Warren as the candidate of choice. They are supporting Sanders, and with the greatest vigor I've seen - especially those who are people of color and/or LGBTQ. I won't speak for them but what I see is the way Bernie has been a consistent voice for real progressivism and intersectional politics, which is a big part of why you see the young, progressive women and POC in congress getting behind Sanders.
I think it's quite sad that when we talk about feminism and oppression, we still look to people like Warren and Clinton (especially Clinton) as being THE figureheads because of their identity while ignoring the outspoken voices of young women of color, working class women, and the LGBTQ community.
The fact that Warren couldn't expand her reach beyond predominantly college educated white people isn't an aberration. To look through the lens of gender alone would be a tremendous mistake.
Meanwhile, this article and many comments seem to draw Biden and Bernie as almost equivalent. Yes, they are both old, straight, white men with a long time in politics. But it doesn't take any deep digging to know that they are radically different (emphasis on RADICAL). To gloss over the great disparity between them as people and politicians is to risk settling for ignorance and complacency as citizens.
But what do I know? I'm just a young person.
3
I honestly don't believe the reason there are no women left in the Democratic primaries is because of sexism.
None of the women candidates including Harris, Gabbard, Williamson, Warren and Klobuchar dazzled me, although Klobuchar might be more viable if she learned how to connect with audiences better.
Warren waffled on Medicare for all. Harris never had anything to say after ambushing Biden in the first debate. Gabbard and Williamson, well, enough said. Klobuchar had a chance before she failed to defend herself against attacks about a case she tried 25 years ago.
4
And Biden “dazzles” you?
I predict Trump will win handily in 2020. And Nikki Haley will be elected in 2024. And when the first female President is a Republican and a minority, perhaps Democrats will finally abandon the identity politics rhetoric that keeps losing elections.
4
If a woman would like to be president, then maybe one should run a decent campaign. No one can credibly claim that Hillary, Kamala, or Warren did not make fatal mistakes. The same can simply not be said of Bernie. Yes, there has so far been no woman president. Prior to 2016 that mostly had to do with the historically patriarchal world order. But this is no excuse for the failure of the most prominent female candidates in this cycle or the last. Patriarchy did not cause Hillary not to campaign in Wisconsin or Michigan. Patriarchy did not cause Kamala or Warren to flip-flop. Patriarchy did not cause Warren to begin waging a vapid identity-political attack against a man whose progressivism, feminism, and popularity in Congress are unsurpassed.
5
Perhaps there will be a female VP under Biden or Sanders. That would be a step up for women in political terms. Not to mention cabinet appointments. Don't forget Warren, Harris, and Klobuchar are still Senators. Not enough, but not too shabby. Don't give up hope.
3
I think that Ms Clinton was taken very seriously. Probably more than any other Democratic candidate. So much so, that the Russians had to step in and help Trump. Maybe next time it will be different.
10
The problem is in how we conduct elections.
Imagine if we could have Biden AND Warren (and Klobuchar et al) in the general election against Trump--without fear of a vote-splitting spoiler scenario in which supporting your true favorite backfires.
That's the promise of ranked choice voting, which Howard Dean advocated in an October 2016 NYT guest column and which has gained a lot of momentum since.
10
I supported Sen Klobuchar. Sen Warren is out not because her gender but because she ran as Sen Warren. She couldn’t even carry her own state.
6
I voted for Warren, but I also did my homework - and that dissolved the gender/schoomarm bias that I felt about her initially. I visited candidates' websites and took the time to learn about their positions. I read editorials. I discussed the candidates. I listened to differing opinions. I watched as many debates as I could. And she was the candidate who I felt would do the best job and she won my one little vote and a few volunteer hours to canvas and call. But in doing the research, I also discovered other candidates that I felt were worthy of the presidency. I'd never committed this much time to choosing a candidate, but am glad I did and will again next time around. I just find it a shame that Warren, with so much to offer this country may be out of the race.
16
Like the other females candidates (but also man candidates!!!) were put out the race by their own mistakes. First, let us not forget was the Pocahontas thing and DNA etc. Then the delay in explaining =how to pay etc. then a solution for everything that looked really a little bit too much. But also let us not forget the tremendous campaign that the media and the democratic establishment orchestrated against her (and Sanders' too!!) plan for medicare for all. The left has no choice but to start a new party hoping to get enough traction to influence the elections.
@Mur anyone who glosses over Pocahontasgate seriously dismisses an electorate exhausted by hypocrisy
I would gladly have supported and voted for Amy Klobochur. If Elizabeth Warren is the candidate I’ll hold my nose and vote for her, anyone but Trump. My preference has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with their policies.
As an aside, Sen Klobochur comes across as forceful but likeable. Sen Warren OTOH comes across like an attack dog. I’m guessing that, and not gender, is why with similar policies Sanders thrives and Warren doesn’t.
1
The fact that you can see Elizabeth Warren as an attack dog, but not Bernie Sanders, makes the author's point.
16
@Mark F Sen Klobuchar came across as a woman who would be better suited selling essential oils at a mall kiosk. Sen Warren was never going to get past Pocahontasgate. Better luck next time. Stop blaming sexism.
Perhaps because I'm a boomer, Biden and Sanders's age doesn't bother me, although I worry about their longevity. But I'm deeply disappointed that Warren didn't fare better. I'm so tired of American misogyny. We need more women at every level of government, but especially at the top.
9
"“So there are a lot of women who might not vote for a woman because they’re worried that other voters won’t vote for her."
Sadly, so typical of women ... to worry more about others than themselves.
Warren has been my candidate the whole time. I voted for her in the Washington State primary, which isn't until March 10. She may have dropped out by then, wasting my vote, as happened to a lot of folks who sent in their vote-by-mail ballot before Buttigeig, Klobuchar and Bloomberg dropped out.
It's utterly nonsensical to focus on "stumbles" that she had. Biden is nothing but stumbles, and he was the last Democrat that I wanted in the office. Look where he is now. I'll do anything to get Trump out, and I will vote for Biden, but I don't want Biden. He is just too scatterbrained. How will he survive debates with the House of Abject Cruelty that is Trump with dozens of gaffs per appearance?
11
Not shaking Sanders's hand at the debate was the point I knew she couldn't win the nomination. Some called it rude and such. If Warren shook his hand while accusing him of lying she would have been accused of being disingenuous. If done by a man it may have been interpreted as a power move. The standard is not higher its an ever shifting maze filled with pitfalls.
10
This former Republican ran a poor campaign, relied on gimmick rather than substantive consistency, and blamed sexism when it seemed to suit her purpose instead of tightening up her own operation. Stop it already. I am a female and voted for Bernie. Integrity and consistency explain most of the variance here. I will vote for the right female candidate, the moment she shows up.
3
I’m still voting for Pochahantas (even if I must write her in by the time my state has its primary).
2
Bernie and Biden were easily the frontrunners from the very beginning. They both have the biggest name recognition, and they had a deep well of good will among their supporters.. Just like Hillary four years ago.
..-- This has been a diverse primary, and the fact that it is going to end up with just one candidate does not cancel that initial diversity.
..--Biden was the VP for eight years under Obama, and Bernie has his huge grass roots support from 2016.
--They've had a built in advantage..that really has nothing to do with being white and male.
1
Elizabeth Warren IS 'too strident, too shrill, too hectoring and too inflexible'... just like Sanders. That's exactly her problem. For much of the hard left she's really just Bernie-lite and why bother with lite when Sanders is right there, in all his dem-socialist splendor, to choose instead?
3
backed the wrong candidate - folks needed to get behind Ms. Harris who has the human touch, a hallmark of her leadership potential. Ms. Klobuchar has that, too - just in a more "middle" way. the moral of the story -- there can't be ideological litmus tests; and identity-based politics itself is corrosive and by definition exclusionary.
the electorate needs to move beyond these "boxes" in general, especially to defeat the social media monster. hate is an easy emotion readily roused.
1
Sexism is a reality in American life. During the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, Carly Fiorina was by far the most impressive debater. Yet, her campaign failed to register much support and she was forced to drop out early. In this campaign, Elizabeth Warren has been the most intelligent, competent, and articulate candidate. Unfortunately, given the lack of intellectual and social development of most Americans, she must leave this race now and support her ideological blood brother, Bernie Sanders, to preserve the hard work she has done on behalf of the vulnerable Americans in the middle and lower working classes. Ladies, as an African-American progressive activist, I know you are hurting now. I know you were devastated by Hillary’s unexpected defeat. However, you must face reality. There is a path for Liz to take to achieve all of your goals. Sanders needs her. He is roughly seven years older and has had a heart attack. Ms. Warren could be a great Vice President. She could insist on overseeing the restructuring of this economy to help working Americans. God forbid, if Sanders falls seriously ill, Ms. Warren would be fully qualified to lead us. Let’s encourage Ms. Warren to join the Sanders campaign.
7
@Howard Gregory
(1) What did Elizabeth Warren do or so that causes you to say she was the most intelligent, competent, and articulate candidate. Saying "I have a plan for that" every minute does not constitute intelligence.
(2) Can we PLEASE get someone just a decade or so younger than 70+ in the White House? We do not need two septuagenarians in the White House. And I would say the same thing if Warren won the nomination and Sanders or Biden got mentioned as VP. NO! Enough wth the old folks campaign for glory.
@Howard Gregory Biden would be wise to add Fiorina to his ticket
She’s too smart for her own good. I admire a lot about Elizabeth Warren, but we don’t need a endless “ plan” for every problem and issue. We need a leader. She’s an intellectual and the consummate insider planner, not an inspiring leader. Plus, her evolving “Medicare for all” is as radical and ridiculous as Sanders. Trump showed you need not be an intellectual, doer, or planner to get elected. You need to inspire voters, base instincts or good instincts, to rally around you as a candidate. She does make the cut.
2
@PS She is too smart? Listen. I will do the same.
Pete would be better than either of these guys. No one’s making excuses for him.
2
Disappointing. But realistically, why would one expect better outcomes from a system that elected Trump only a short time ago? Something (money in politics, the media) will have to change first.
2
My party has betrayed me and doesn't represent me at all. All we have now all old white men? I'd become an independent except my state doesn't allow independents to vote in primaries. Biden should never have been put forward for this contest. He should have been the elder statesman and helped someone such as Amy Klobuchar become a better national campaigner. I'm angry and disappointed and have no idea who to vote for now. Don't tell me it's about beating Trump. Trump will be president for four more years. Luckily my track record at predicting elections is awful, so no need to worry...much.
5
I want a candidate who is smart, articulate, and has a track record of success. I want someone that can articulate the problems that are important to me and propose sensible, achievable solutions to those problems. I don’t care about their color, age, sex, religion - none of it matters to me. That said, as soon as they start playing identity politics, I’m on to the next candidate. Stand on your merits and show me what you can do. I can see what you were born with; I want to know what you’ll bring to the presidency.
2
Warren compromised her own campaign by accepting Super PAC donations. How could any progressive back her when there was another candidate espousing her ideals and refusing corporate donations?
People don’t want money in politics. Trump ran on draining the swamp, and your refusal to acknowledge that fact is how you remain so comically out of touch.
(By the way, your selection about women being scared to vote for women could just as easily be about Bernie Sanders’s alleged “electability”.)
1
"It’s hard for any candidate to get the formula right. For women, it is harder because of a host of unconscious biases."
Behold, the ultimate, irrefutable, all purpose accusation.
1
None of Clinton, Warren, Harris...had put forth a grand vision or narrative for what their long term goals would be. They offered no structural critique. At best, they proposed changes at the margins. Simple flowery language isn’t enough. Nor is the fact that you’d be the first female president.
1
@Nima 'flowery language is not enough"? and so you, like so many of the commentators here, are making the authors point for her, but don't even know it. have you listened to bernie or biden? such a double standard. just curious - what do you think is Biden's grand vision or narrative?
1
It is beyond depressing that so many talented women, and talented younger men, had no shot. And neither did Buttigieg or Cory Booker or Juan Castro, the future of the party.
Instead we a dithering so-called "nice guy" who is responsible for trashing Anita Hill and getting Clarence Thomas a lifetime appointment on the supreme court, and who shilled for predatory banks, and voted cowardly for war. I'll vote for him, because even with all this baggage he's better than Trump, and smart enough to surround himself with much smarter people and nurture them for what I hope is a democratic candidacy in 2024. I'm not optimistic.
8
I have a feeling that many women simply hate women who do not use their femininity as a weapon to win power. They perceive this as a humiliating betrayal. They don't want to be reminded of their "weaker sex" status, they want to keep telling themselves that they are the one who wield power "in their own special way", re. through manipulation and sex.
I am also convinced that many--even most men in some cultures--are disconcerted by women who do not use their femininity as a weapon to win power. Being treated by a woman as a peer is profoundly disorienting to such men.
It is as simple as that. It is also understandable, in a way. After all, what is left for Man to do, if Woman can do everything--including fighting in a war--as well as he can, whereas he feels himself useless in many a Woman's roles?
Of course, there are men who are perfectly comfortable with peerness with women. I do wonder whether they are a majority even in otherwise highly advanced countries, though.
7
@Luisa really interesting point, that i had not thought of. but really resonates.
1
I do think that some of what happened with some women candidates (and some of the men also) is that they thought being snarky and mean-spirited toward their competition would win them votes. It worked for a day or two. A lot of people like a fight. But in the end, for many of us it just grew tiresome. They had nothing intelligent to say; just a few snarky remarks to make about someone else. God only knows what their own platform was. They were far too busy insulting others to go into details about their own platform. Then, there is the lying and embellishments. America is REALLY tired of lies and embellishments. So, yes! We would all love to see a woman win the presidency. But it is going to require intelligence, integrity, honesty, dignity, and a good bit of class as well. Part of why Obama won 8 years overwhelmingly is that he exhibited all of these traits.
1
As well as the overt sexism in Warrens case, its telling that Sanders complains about youth turnout not being enough.
I would argue that the Bernie Bros passion [and arrogant bullying] online does not translate to actual votes.
There was an interesting article recently either here or on the Guardian that discussed research that showed that millenial white males were the most politically active on social media/youtube etc and online discussion groups, but the least likely to actually community organise - or vote...
But Sanders is an ideologue rather than a prgmatist and attracts similar. It seems as nearly full of religious fervour as Trumps base or Corbyns Momentum.
Its profoundly saddening about Warren, the world desperately needs a steady hand in the US who is good at listening and a practical doer, especially when Merkel is gone.
8
We need a women's press outlet that will consciously write headlines that feature women's ideas and voices and photos. Men (and women) subconsciously put women second in the mainstream press. Women's voices are subconsciously considered nagging and irritating and whining based on deep seated patterns based in our childhoods.
7
"It’s impossible to know the degree to which gender factors into a candidate’s political appeal, or lack thereof, especially at the presidential level. Man or woman, winning the presidency is not merely — or even largely — a question of merit. Americans are forever seeking that indefinable spark — a secret blend of strength and likability, authority and relatability, a talent for inspiring and connecting with voters."
And then the author disavows her own reasoning by asserting Warren lost because of her gender with no data to actually back up her assertions. There was a point in the polling she was doing very well. And then she wasn't, the more people saw her campaign. Do you think people didn't realize she was a woman when they said she was their preferred choice? Or how smart she was was or how great a debater she was? Doesn't it tell you something that Warren's home state disavowed her? Perhaps Warren just didn't campaign well enough?
HRC lost in 2016, but there many factors besides her gender. And she did get the most votes. We thought it would be decades before a black person would be elected president but then came Obama, the same will happen with women
Also the comment about Bernie & Biden's age makes no sense in comparison to Warren -- she is a septuagenarian born only a few years after WW2, not a millennial. She is not a great example of turning things over to a younger generation
2
"Either would make a better president than the unstable man-child currently degrading the office."
Was that remark really necessary when what we are discussing is Warren, Biden and Sanders?
Are there no limits to hatred? And yes, this is hatred.
2
I'm simply very tired & very sad. From the beginning of the campaign cycle, two Democratic hopefuls captured my heart & my imagination. In my ideal fantasy, they would make an ideal presidential/vice-presidential team IN ANY ORDER. Now one (Mayor Pete) has dropped out and the other (Elizabeth Warren) is struggling. We are left with 3 old men: two who bellow (one Republican one nominally Democrat) and spout vague promises (sorry Bernie, no road map & costings, no vote - don't like a pig in a poke) (sorry little Donnie - who knew health care could be hard duh-oh) and one who manages to confuse his wife & sister (wakey wakey). Rumors of a dark horse fail to move, more like third rate cop out. Wake me when its over.
3
@Sandra I hear you. Do give Sanders’ website a scroll through. It’s not all pipe dreams. Warren and Sanders are ideologically very similar as are their plans for how to fund such. I’m also very tired and very sad and will wake you when it’s over.
Joe Biden must choose a woman as his vice presidential candidate. Joe himself is not sure whether he will run in 2024, but choosing one of our worthy ladies, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Kolbuchar or Karmela Harris will set them up as a future president. but perhaps appointing them to a powerful cabinet position will do just as well.
2
Actually, Tulsi Gabbard is still in the race. Not only that, she is going to use her one delegate to gain admission to the next debate in order to throw bombs at both front runners for reasons that are clear only to her. I hope the moderators give time in strict proportion to the percentage of delegates a candidate has earned. That will allow for Tulsi to have time to basically say her name. Better yet, the DNC should change the rules to exclude her, since no matter what the rules are, she complains that she is being victimized.
2
OK Hate me for saying this, but image is more important than many will admit. I look at the photo of Warren with this article and wonder why is she dressed the way I do to go grocery shopping while men on the campaign trail are usually in suits?
She's bright. She's very capable. But as many others have noted she sounds too school-marmy. Don't these candidates have people to tell them how to dress, how to modulate their speaking manner. Or don't the candidates listen?
98
@Ann Drew Hmm, this points to women being more judgemental than men. Why does it matter what one looks like? When I was younger, I interviewed at at the top Ivy leagues for a faculty position (which I was offered in most cases) in t-shirts with a slogan or my previous school logo (no jacket, no tie, etc.).
This is my point and Cottle's point: that men can get away with this behaviour in the US. They get away with it because of both other men and women!
I am/was always behind Warren. Even her so-called "mistakes" were MINOR relative to Biden's gaffes and past behaviour. Obama was also aloof and professorial so I don't think that's the issue with Warren. She and Sanders are animated and this bothers voters who prefer reality TV presidents (look at where we are now).
I think this time voters didn't want to risk it given the outcome. But if 2020 turns out to be like 2016, then there's going to be some soul searching to be done by everyone.
Warren has received some bad advice but her mistakes were very few relatively. Biden is walking mistake --- he just can't seem to help himself.
94
@Ann Drew Every candidate modulates their authentic self to the extent that they desire to project the look, image, performance that others will accept or embrace. That Warren has not done so in a way that meets with your satisfaction reveals just how unreasonable our expectations of politicians may be in our increasingly diverse world. I
see nothing wrong with the way she is dressed ... and FWIW, many, many men long ago ditched the "all suits all the time" style of dressing on the trail. Open collar shirts and slacks are the norm with the later often being replaced by dress jeans in many situations.
62
@Ann Drew
Would you like to draw up a list of what is appropriate wear? Thats kind of what HRC did - seek input as to what she should wear ( and her hair and her makeup)-- which made her - tada: Inauthentic! Trying too hard to please too many constituencies.
I kind of like Warren's choice to where black with bright jackets: it became what you looked for. It's also a uniform - which allows one to keep focused on the goals, not on you clothes, shoes, etc. But this is a uniform more suited to the present, to constant travel and shifting weather conditions.
Should we reject someone who looks a bit LIKE us???
95
I think the reason women don't do well was very well identified in your article. It is the "us" (women, that is) versus "them" (men). The moment a candidate begins this game, she has lost. It is a sign of huge insecurity. The moment Klobuchar attacked Pete as a man, she went down. Pete is a very intelligent person and being gay helped him with a lot of people in the Democratic party. Warren chose to blame misogyny rather than poor campaigning skills and a weak platform. Clinton did the same thing. Calling bad names people that a candidate wants to vote for her is self-defeating. Please don't encourage women to repeat this mistake over and over with such opinions.
2
We saw several exceptional women. Anyone of them would make an excellent VP. I prefer Klobuchar because she is younger.
I think Biden/Klobuchar or Biden/Harris would be a powerful ticket.
Please select someone less than 60.
3
While there are many things I like about Warren, I think the underlying problem is that she's just too wonky to run for President. I liked Amy very much -- she was my favorite from the first debate -- but she wasn't able to attract enough support for a sustained run. As to Hillary, she had a great convention but didn't capitalize on the momentum she got from it. Instead of hitting the campaign trail hard -- like her husband and Al Gore and done in '91, she spent the summer in the Hamptons or something like that. What was she thinking?
2
She's not done. If Elizabeth Warren decides to suspend her campaign (not halt it, by no means should she halt it), and Democrats' true goal is to beat Trump, the real unity move would be for Biden and Sanders to stand together on the same stage and for each to name her as their running mate. This would allow each of the old men to campaign/win/lose on their own merits and give her freedom and ability to shape the platform going into the convention. Warren supporters could support either one, all the way to the nomination, and then vote blue. Because no matter who, she would be there.
10
Let's not forget that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote with a lot going against her... Russian interference, Comey's statement, and third party candidates stealing her votes. This country absolutely can and WILL elect a woman. In the meantime, if Biden is our Presidential candidate, I expect he will have a woman as VP. And that will be an important first.
6
Unfortunately the idea of up by your bootstraps is invariably linked to men, no one gives credit to women for their hardscrabble success story. Their experience is just discounted. After reading Warren's book A Fighting Chance several years ago I became a great fan. Maybe she can be VP. Personally I think she overshot, she should have stuck to identifying what she knows is wrong and wait for the prescriptions of how to fix them later. Her plans were information overload that was too much change for most Americans.
7
When Barack Obama ran for President in 2008 he never dwelled on his race or the significance of becoming the first African American President. Ultimately he was pushed into it with the Reverend Wright issue and delivered a very memorable speech akin to what John F. Kennedy did when he was forced to address his Catholicism. Elizabeth Warren and other female candidates tend to repeatedly bring up their gender while campaigning for President. I think that is a mistake. It can sound like they are trying to use guilt to garner votes and it is unbecoming. Nancy Pelosi is one of the most consequential political leaders in our country today and I can not recall one instance where she appeared to specifically refer to her gender for political gain. She would be a pretty good role model for the next serious female candidate for the presidency.
13
I liked most of the candidates in this D primary and feel any would be better than the criminal in the WH. I was thrilled to see the diversity, passion, and morals. But I was looking for policy, pragmatism and the ability to right our capsized ship without flipping it on its other side.
I know what sexism is; like other women, including Elizabeth, I experience it every day. It is not sexist to say that Elizabeth is the most intelligent candidate on stage with the most detailed plans but decide to vote against her because I disagree with her on key policy issues that smell too much like Bernie's freebies that we can ill afford. Like so many others have said--including some of my well-educated women friends--she was my second choice. But absolutely, had my top two candidates been equal on policy (with Liz holding more moderate views), I would have temporarily wavered thinking about "electability" given the stakes of this election--the highest I can imagine against this authoritarian occupying the White House--and enthusiastically pulled the lever for her. If she could have connected with all of us in the middle, she would have been a bigger contender.
1
I can go on and on about my disappointment about not having a woman at the top of the ticket. But we need to look forward - and fight hard to have a woman as VP for whichever old man wins the Democratic ticket. No excuses, Biden or Bernie!
8
I wish this would stop. When a man drops out (as so many have) its because he had ideas that didn't resonate, or had a bad (or no) personality, but when a woman does poorly its because ... she's a woman?
Maybe give Americas (most of them) a bit more credit?
I try to be an educated voter. I look at everyone's positions. I didn't want Warren at all. I looked at her plans, and had serious concerns about a lot of them. It is easy to have plans. But having good plans, that actually have a chance of being enacted into law, is a whole different story.
Yes, I'm a white dude, an independent that leans right fiscally and left on social issues. Have voted both R and D over the years.
I would never have voted for Warren. Not because she is a woman, in fact I actually think that among the Democrats on stage, while Amy didn't run the best campaign, she would have made the best President. Solid, mid-western, and straightforward. Old enough to be well seasoned, but still young enough that I wouldn't be worried about a heart attack in her first term. With a sort of calmness even when surrounded by shouting people. And a long history of actual accomplishments working across the aisle.
I'd never vote against someone on the basis of gender, race, creed or color. That would just be wrong. Both morally at the personal level, and as a citizen that wants the absolute best person for the job. But voting for someone on that basis is something I'd consider equally wrong.
9
We all know the importance of having a woman presidency and know that it’s necessary for political evolution as a culture, but Warren was never a great choice. I think we all acknowledge this deep down. We need the right candidate, and it’ll happen.
3
Honestly, I know a lot of women who quietly can't stand just Warren, but the entire brand of performative, virtue signaling "intersectional" feminism she represents.
Women - including adult women - have always been more affected by peer pressure and social taboo. Men get to be un-PC and laugh at Dave Chappelle; good, liberal suburban moms have to "Be Kind." Sanders gets to accept Joe Rogan's endorsement; moms have to shut up and take it while their daughters are beaten in track by competitors with male bodies.
Especially since Trump was elected and opposition organized into the Women's March, there has been a heavy load of peer pressure on college educated, suburban white women to publically signal our politically correct virtue, renounce our "privilege", and support a whole host of "intersectional" positions, some of which are in direct opposition to our own interests as women (as on gender identity issues), as wives and mothers (on the most extreme tendencies of #MeToo) or aren't even supported by the people we are patronizing (such as on racial issues). Any dissent is met with Mean Girl shunning.
And a lot of suburban women quietly and deeply resent this. But it is rare that one of us breaks omerta except in the most safe, private conversations.
Many of us can't stand Warren and her role in this culture.
I will be glad when Trump is gone, this culture cools down, and college educated women are allowed to openly disagree about politics again.
16
Ms. Or Dr. Warren did not ‘elect’ to be left out of WSJ’s recent poll. She has actively been discounted - not just by voters , but by the media. Also those who have been paying attention know full well that she well understands our financial markets - so well that Wall Street and the upper echelon of banking and financial systems fear her. She should have run in 2016. I’m afraid 2024 will be too late & we’ll all be even more beholden to big business including banks & the oil industry. Merely getting someone other than DJT in office is not enough!!
10
Elizabeth Warren brags about CFPA and how Wall Street is afraid of her. But CFPA mostly focuses on lending and credit abuse. Which gives Wall Street and Corp Mgt free rein to fleece our public markets via excessive comp, stock options, buybacks, rubber stamp boards, high frequency trading, short term stock based comp, golden parachutes, etc. Warren is Wall Streets best friend. She plays small ball while they launder their average Americans money into their pockets.
1
I'm a highly educated Asian-American woman, more or less a bullseye for Warren's key demographic. I voted in a Super Tuesday state and supported Warren until I saw the writing on the wall: she had already lost four states and had next to no support among key voting blocs—Latinx people, African-Americans, moderates, white rural voters. That's when I switched my vote to Bernie, not before.
Ultimately, we need to fix this barbaric procedure of early voting states that effectively decide the race before the rest of the country weighs in. Why doesn't everyone just vote at once?
16
I've been a strong supporter of Warren ever since Andrew Yang left the race, but if ideas matter more that individual egos the time has come for her to drop out and gracefully endorse Sanders.
Yes, we all know she was the best, but sometimes the best need to accept the will of the majority. It's called democracy.
3
It isn’t that simple. Warren would make a very good secretary of HHS in a Biden administration. She probably realizes there won’t be a Sanders administration.
3
@Purple Patriot
Really? I wonder if I'm the only one who doesn't "realize" there won't be a Sanders administration. I think it's still early for such a prediction.
Or stupidity
I had a colleague (male, "Democrat", "progressive") recently ask me who I might vote for & he added that he wondered if "anyone from our SES group" (meaning affluent but not wealthy, working professionals) would vote for Warren. He was genuinely curious and, to his credit, willing to admit that he was afraid that Warren was ready to engage in too many "give aways"...."free college", "Medicare for all". This sums up one of Warren's major problems: too many people who are keeping households running are worried that she & Bernie will give away the store. Families who have sacrificed financially to to provide for their kids & retirement & health care are not enthused about seeing "others" possibly benefit from the largesse that Bernie wants to provide while these households have saved, scrimped and worked long hours to provide. Warren had to have a plan for every issue raised by the liberal and middle-of-the-road wings of the party. You can't please all of the people all the time & there are few intellectuals, let alone voters, reading the plans.
These concerns highlight the Democrats' dilemma. No candidate has appeared to galvanize the majority, the party has not been strategic in either how the caucuses/primaries are run nor in how to broadly appeal.
I am sad....I wanted Warren to make it - a brilliant, up from her bootstraps gal who earned major credentials in her life & is committed to the public good.
9
@In the Americas I wanted Warren to make it too and feel so sad tonight. She is the candidate I want to have a beer with. Or six.
I personally hope that Liz Warren will not get out of the race. I hope that she will be on the debate stage up until the convention. Clearly, no longer to win the nomination (she would have been a good president, in my opinion). But let her advance her vision and ideals, and basic decency. Let her continue to speak truth to power. Integrity is a quality in short supply in America in 2020.
19
I greatly admire and respect Senator Warren. I'm even a little in awe of her. But the point was made that Warren has spent years among academics who comprise an academic culture. Some academicians have made the leap into politics with great success but it's not the norm. Lawyers run for public office more often than law professors.
4
@AGoldstein
Elizabeth Warren is a lawyer, a former special ed teacher, a college professor, a US Senator, as well a mother and sister. That is a very wide range of experience, and not by any stretch mostly part of the academic culture.
9
She has been a Senator for several years, and thus is not “just” an academic.
Big structural change, real good plans, all of them, no boat-rocking involved. Perfect strategy. Perfect brand. But these MEN, right?
5
With Bernie its all about justice.
Biden its about unity and progress.
But with Warren it seems to mostly be about Warren:
- I got CFPA done
- I am a fighter
- I have a plan for that
- Wall Street hates me
No, Wall Street and big business like Warren. They know she’ll focus on small stuff so they can continue to fleece our public markets. She’s not a bad person, she’s just not focused on things that will fix our capital markets. Lending and credit card abuse is small ball. Its about fleecing average peoples money - stock based comp, rubber stamp boards, high frequency trading, etc.
@Pat Aungier Wall Street does not like Warren. come on..
Great piece. I live in New Zealand, where we are lucky enough to have Jacinda Ardern as our prime minister and I cannot tell you the difference it has made to the feel of our country to have a leader who prioritises communication and empathy alongside action and policy. Currently she is dealing with her third national crisis that has hit our country: the mosque shooting, the Whaakari eruption and now the Coronavirus. She is magnificent in a crisis, but it’s also the day-to-day changes that have happened here. We are now a far more family-friendly country; whereas before we were still of the national attitude that children were just something that got in the way of work being done. Having a woman, let alone a mother, in a leadership position no longer feels like the crapshoot it once was. Women in the US, you deserve a lot better than you’re currently getting.
44
As brilliant and compassionate as Warren is, her campaign had flaws. It's sad, I think, that a campaign's strategy has to be something other than purely factual and reasoned, but this is what politics is about. Another article in the Times today questioned how Warren portrayed her own story, or how much she did—whether she should have been Best from Oklahoma, instead of Liz from Harvard—and there's something in that. Yes, I believe sexism played a role, as it seems to do for every female candidate for the presidency (although not so much, it appears, for regional offices, like Senate or Congress, which is interesting). In Warren's particular case, though, it may ultimately have come down to intangible personality or storytelling issues. I would have voted for her; she's a smart person and her heart is clear yin the right place.
4
This is simply an issue of likability, nothing to do with gender.
I feel that trying to divide people according to their gender is a nonsense that most people can see, except for those within mainstream media circles.
Elizabeth Warren tested that theory, a self appointed defender of women she doesn't know and who don't seem to like her very much. This woke, angry, rights in the workplace message has fallen flat, as well it should do.
Charisma is king, and she never had a chance.
6
Do you really think that Sanders is more like able than Amy Klobuchar? If so think about why and what traits make him like able. Is it his arm waving, his yelling, his dogmatic point of views? Now what about Klobuchar, is it her mannerisms or is it because she is a woman and she doesn’t yell and isn’t dogmatic. Somehow women are never likeable. Why is that?
In general a broad range of behaviors in men are likeable. Women can behave identically and are not likeable. A brainy man is likeable as young sharp buck! A prodigy! An identical woman is annoyingly professorial! Thanks for reminding us misogyny is alive and well.
It is not that complicated. Whoever is running fro president needs to get people to vote for them if they want to win. It is completely up to the voters and when the voters see a candidate that they want she will win. It just hasn't happened yet.
2
I was disappointed she did not win any delegates. I voted for her because I thought it would be great to have a woman president. She also has so much experience I thought she would do better in her home state Massachusetts. Perhaps next election cycle will be different.
3
In times of political chaos verging on disaster many will cling to the center - what is known - all or in part. The average voter will vote for the candidate that will recalibrate the right-wing reach more towards the center. I do believe (hope?) Biden's presidency (if it turns out) will gather ideas from a diverse cabinet - those who will be willing to work hard to push back at this right-wing juggernaut that is threatening to overrun our central concept of constitutional & cultural decency.
2
She stabbed Bernie Sanders in the back, stealing votes from the only progressive who was viable. A sad day since Biden offers only the status quo in a world filled with serious problems to solve.
3
Even though I knew the odds were against her, I am proud to have voted for Elizabeth Warren. She had all the makings of a good president. I would very much have liked to see her stand up to Trump in a debate. In another world, I guess.
33
My wife and I supported Pete Buttigieg. Our second choice was Elizabeth Warren. Neither of their "identifying characteristics" lead us to support them. It was their articulate vision for America that sold us. But we were aware of - and somewhat bothered by - Sen. Warrens' mercurial nature.
When she started an unprovoked, irrational, atonal, and provocative attack on Michael Bloomburg - the diatribe that ended with "And he said "kill it" - my wife and I turned to each other and said the same thing: her campaign just ended. Gender had little to do with it. Ineptitude had a lot to do with it,
And so it goes.
11
@Tony Deitrich
See I saw her stand up to a billionaire republican turned democrat ( because he hates donald) and i cheered. He got his billions and then further enriched the already wealthy like donald while the rest of us lost wealth and the power that goes with it.
You supported moderate Pete, liked progressive Liz second, but ditched her because she had the nerve to attack the basically a Republican Bloomberg? I guess you are proof to the truism that voters don’t vote based on politicians actual positions and policies.
Regarding Senator Klobuchar's thought's on Mayor Buttigieg: If AOC were three years younger than Pete, and eligible to run, she'd have received even more attention than he did. She is an exceptional person and Pete is an exceptional person. If a mediocre 38 year old man had made it that far I'd be right there with her calling it out.
2
@AMK - He IS mediocre. The man has never held an office higher than Mayor of a place that doesn't even qualify as a city. The only thing exceptional about him was the audacity of thinking that someone who ran South Bend, Indiana, and not very well if you happen to be Black, felt that he was ready to be the leader of the free world. I would say the same of AOC. Neither of them has accomplished ANYTHING by the way of legislation or initiatives to improve the lot of their constituencies or moving their progressive agendas forward. And that by the way, is my main problem with Sanders. For all of his railing about income inequality -- exactly what has he accomplished in his 31 years in politics to change it? Sanders and Buttigieg, like many politicians, spouted popular sound-bites, but to paraphrase Gertrude Stein -- there was nothing there by way of actual accomplishment.
1
This is not just about Elizabeth Warren, or Amy Klobuchar, or Kamala Harris, or Hillary Clinton. In the end, this is a reflection of our country in general. Not only in presidential elections, but in all aspects of life, women are still held to higher, and continuously shifting standards, in order to compete with less qualified men. In business as well as in politics, ambitious men are considered leaders, while ambitious women are considered shrill. How many of us have hit glass ceilings in our professions, despite being better prepared, and in many cases are already doing the work of male colleagues who receive the promotion and are touted as "leaders"? Sexism is still very much alive and well throughout American society.
39
Agree completely. If Elizabeth Warren were a man, she’d be the front runner.
7
There's still the Vice Presidency or a Cabinet position.
Klobuchar, Warren and Harris all have a lot to offer.
Putting one of them on the ticket could help unite disgruntled Primary voters.
No matter who the nominee is, vote Democratic.
If you stay home in November because it's not your favorite, you will have cast a vote for Trump.
We need every vote we can get.
Vote D.
12
It was a diverse field. It will be from here on out. That's better than good, it's essential to the political health of this nation. That said, it's going to take more than diversity to beat this president. None of the diversity candidates were ready this time. They will be next time.
1
HRC & Senator Warren were two deeply flawed candidates and it has nothing to do with being a women - it's their actions and policies that led to their downfall. To ignore that and blame it on their gender ignores the facts and will led to the same old same old in another 4 years. I don't know anyone who openly would not support a women for President , in fact several comments from male friends noted that it's time for a women president and is probably a change that would be a positive for the country. Margret Thatcher comes up as an example from them.
If Biden gets the nod for the nomination, and he picks Amy K. as his VP (who i think would be extremely qualified to serve) , I don't think Trump would win more than a handful of states - most GOP voters I talk to are looking just for someone reasonable on the Dem side to vote for - Trump fatigue is real among the right, but only for a more centrist candidate.
And that would set up a very interesting 2024 election - Amy K. vs Nikki Haley , I don't think we could go wrong with either of these two in that election.
5
It's pretty clear that Warren is the most qualified of the remaining Democratic field to be President, when you consider her age, intelligence, seriousness, disposition, and very well researched strategy for how she would pull the levers of executive authority to get things done in the face of Republican obstructionism. Her ability to "reach across the aisle" is better than Sanders and probably not as good as Biden. But the real problem with her is that she is a woman, and many voters think that is a liability in a contest with Impeached Trump. Very sad indeed!
36
Still voting for Warren next Tuesday. Conscience demands it.
Hey, I'm a guy who would vote for Klobuchar or Gabbard in a heartbeat! But Hillary C. and E. Warren ARE, as you say, "inauthentic." They would do or say (or accuse someone of) anything to get elected. If I'm wrong about them, this is, nevertheless, the impression they themselves have created. They have no one else to blame.
5
Warren had her devoted lane: highly educated white voters. She took #1 place among voters with graduate degrees. The problem is that voting block is tiny. When I think about how to create more Warren voters it seems pretty clear that Sanders is avocating college education much more than Biden. So for me the strategic choice is to pick Sanders next and help make more future "Warren" type voters down the road.
6
Another question is why has it come down to three--not just old, but elderly men--each showing his advanced age in one way or another. What do they possess that other, more vital candidates did not? Has their advanced age actually been a plus? Are voters looking for the "village elders" to help them through troubled times? There were plenty of highly qualified candidates in the prime of life. Yet they fell by the wayside.
What is it about elderly males that resonates with voters in 2020 A.D.?
14
@doc
maybe we all have "Daddy issues"?
I hope the eventual nominee picks Warren as VP. Those guys are both so old there's a pretty good chance she'd be president mid term.
15
You and your fellow members of the Times' editorial board need to stop framing anything in terms of identity politics. Ms. Warren was undermined by the voters of her home state. There are more registered women voters than men, and a higher percentage of women typically vote than men. What is it about democracy that you don't like, Ms. Cottle, and what do you propose to replace it with?
12
I voted for Warren yesterday and am very glad I did. I'm glad I listened to a dear friend of mine to vote my heart, rather than for Bloomberg, who I thought was the best strategic decision.
The forthcoming autopsy on Ms. Warren's campaign will highlight her odd aversion to running directly against Sanders, her prime challenger for the progressive slot. She proved she could be a withering debater (see what she did to Bloomberg) but for a reason that will forever remain a mystery to me, barely laid a glove on Bernie.
She also seemed to try to out-Bernie Bernie. She should have ran as the reformer she is, not the revolutionary she's not.
I'm glad Biden is now in the lead ahead of Sanders, but gee am I disappointed about Warren.
21
As I pondered Bernie Sanders' and Donald Trump's overperformance against Hillary Clinton, I wondered if it was a) gender, or b) an outsider populist vs the establishment. Seeing how Biden--the most establishment candidate possible (and one without the cognitive abilities of Hillary)--has been crushing Sanders and polling well against Trump suggests to me that it's all about gender.
10
Why would you expect the people who voted for Clinton in the 2016 primary to vote for Warren in 2020?
If people voted for Clinton over Sanders in 2016 because she's a woman, then sure, it makes sense that they'd vote for Warren. But that's almost the only scenario where it does makes sense, unless that voter has had a major change of politics over the last four years.
If you think that people picked Clinton over Sanders in 2016 because Clinton was the centrist candidate, then it makes perfect sense that they chose Biden over Warren and Sanders this time around. Honestly, this one doesn't need a whole lot of explaining.
I've been reading, lately, about how the elite left-learning press is increasingly out of touch with the mainstream voting public, even among democrats, who tend to be far less focused on identity. Perhaps this explains why times editors so baffled that people who voted for a centrist last time voted for a centrist this time.
11
@Jeff Agreed. Talk about mixing completely different categories and concepts, also known as comparing apples and oranges. Good point.
1
@Andy One thing I didn't mention, as another explanation, is that it's certainly possible that people voted for Clinton over Sanders because they felt she was better qualified, rather than because of politics or identity. In that case, someone might pick Warren now for the same reason.
1
Biden had better make good on his promise for a female VP. Warren is a great choice. They may have different ideas but they both have the same mission: save the middle class.
9
This is an unusual time in our country, with "The Donald "as president. Most people want a return to normalcy, and I think that is behind the escalation we have seen In Biden's sudden resurgence. If "The Donald "were not in his position right now, any one of the women mentioned in your opinion piece, would have a chance to gain the presidency. Everyone wants tRump out, and especially the African American electorate. Joe Biden can make a huge impact on the coming election by selecting Stacy Abrams as his Vice Presidential candidate. This would open the field in the future to Women of all ethnicities. She would be an excellent choice, and make the Democratic Party unbeatable in the fall. A big step forward for the human race! We have seen big swings in the political landscape in the past week, nominate Stacy Abrams for VP, and we'd see another big swing. And " The Donald " wouldn't dare to hang a nick-name on her. Let's get back to Normal!
4
Good article. It’s worth noting the double standards. Watching from afar I am shocked at the endorsement of a man (Biden) that is evidently overwhelmed in the debates, has difficulty expressing himself and, unfortunately, promises to be crushed by trump in the presidential debates.
No one ever says anything about the “black support” of Biden and how the conservative tendency of this block is so inconsistent with the social status of the block as a whole. I guess that would be too politically incorrect. Why, moreover, is so much deference given to the southern preferences when the support of that region for trump and the gop is so inevitable?
Good luck democrats. The lack of vision and ambition demonstrated in yesterday’s results, I fear, will not yield a positive result in November.
9
Lament and pontificate all you want, but the goal of a woman President is very doable. Its happened in many countries, e.g. Merkel, May, etc.... and will happen in the US sooner than you think.
We need competitive candidates— as determined by voters — not by the pundits.
Bernie and Joe have been at it and losing repeatedly for decades. Their success today is based on that history.
I think Klobuchar could have gotten it done if she had gotten more resources. Lets see in 9 years once Joe is done.
1
This column is an example of the Times pushing an agenda rather than just speaking the truth. Warren ran a lousy campaign. Sanders and Warren represent the left wing of the party. So who were we left with? Those of us (all 17) on the right wing of the party know that only Biden can beat Trump. Biden does not come with an ideology that Republicans can package into the basis for its quadrennial fear campaign. No one fears Joe Biden. He is exactly what the country needs. Our chance of winning in November is Biden running well in PA, OH, FL, WI, MI and IA. The election must be framed as the United Democrats (oxymoron, I know) vs. Trump the One Man Wrecking Crew who is currently ripping our nation apart piece by piece, institution by institution. Biden is the choice because he is the only Democratic candidate both non-ideological AND who people all over the country have already voted for. And they did so again last night.
The "progressives" are coming but it is not this year and it may not be for another two election cycles. So there is plenty of time for progressives like Warren to work on her campaign chops - which she better do if she has any hope of being President.
4
This may be the one occasion that I would encourage the Democratic candidate for president to take testosterone supplements or peptides. Of course, consult medical and naturopathic doctors before taking supplements. That would kind of put Jill and Jane in charge as a consolation for now.
Warren was a decent candidate but her politico instincts were off. She was forever competing for Bernie’s base which is too ideologically invested in an unpractical “revolution “ to go for her PowerPoint of “plans”. She was not able to identify her voters, her own loyal base besides maybe white college educated women of whom there are not enough of to win primaries or general elections. She was in that middle lane between wanna be radical and wanna be moderate and I could never figure out where exactly where she stood.
She was articulate in debates but also scored some cheap points that made her seem petty. She brought up race often but her solutions sounded theoretical rather than out if lived experience to a person of color like me. She exuded white privilege by expounding pie in the sky ideas and plans, while constantly condemning white privilege. And just getting along with her Republican brothers did not seem enough evidence of her ability to compromise to get things done and unite the country.
Her ideas were too leftward for a center left voter like me and apparently not radical enough for the most leftist folks in the party. I think this explains her struggle to win any primary state better than her gender does.
10
Elizabeth Warren is the most youthful of all of the standing candidates. She has a plan for everything. She has a compelling life story. She one vacillation on transitioning in Medicare for All. That wouldn't get a a mention from a man. Democrats are voting out of fear that Trump will get back in. It's a very sad time for the party. & forget the whole "Big Tent" idea - we lost great candidates, Castro, Harris, likely Warren but allowed Bloomberg to buy a slot on the stage. We are embarrassing ourselves out of fear of the toddler in the white house.
14
I haven't read all 1688 comments, so I'm sure someone else has already said this. At this point, no matter who wins, Bernie or Biden, they will need someone like Senator Kamala Harris on the ticket in November for many, many reasons. I think she would add so much to the ticket, if not be the main draw to many voters.
At their ages - both in their 70s - a single term could be possible. Then. in 2024, you would have a well-known, experienced woman ready to step in. I'm confident she would be elected easily. I'm also surprised that she dropped out so early this year, I was looking forward to learning more about her.
4
@Matt How about a partial term, given their age!
Maybe the Democratic party should alternate allowing male and female candidates every four years. 2024 only female candidates. 2028 mix. 2032 female only. (If we get a two term president it would wait to flip once they were done)
For those of you concerned that isn't fair to men, I say it isn't fair to the electorate. Women have been shown to be better managers. Why should the electorate be deprived?
Maybe even corporations would eventually follow suit.
5
Senator Warren's problem was that it became obvious in the first two debates that she is a political opportunist. She, along with all the other candidates who were trying to make a name for themselves, were stumbling over one another trying to one-up their rivals with how much they wanted to give away freebies, open the borders to anyone and everyone, provide freebies to illegal immigrants, eliminate the second amendment, and increase taxes.
It became obvious very quickly that Bernie is the supreme Communist among the Democratic candidates, and all the others were just part of the "Me Too" populists.
The Democrats need to come back to their roots before yet another defeat is snatched from the clutches of victory.
Everyone wishes that life were not so hard, but it is. Nothing is free. And, if it is free, either it isn't worth having or it will not be appreciated.
6
@DKH
"give away freebies, open the borders to anyone and everyone, provide freebies to illegal immigrants, eliminate the second amendment, and increase taxes."
aside from the last item, not one of the policy ideas you describe is being promoted by ANY Democratic candidate, even the most to the left (meaning Bernie). I don't know where you get your information, but what you say is simply not true. you should read the policy proposals by Democratic candidates and really understand them before you spout inaccurate generalizations.
aside from that: yes, of course there would be tax raises involved but (again, if you know what the candidates are actually saying) those involve raises for the 1%—NOT for those with assets UNDER $50 MILLION. which means most of the electorate. do you really mind that 75,000 people who make millions more than you do will get taxed an extra 2 CENTS on every dollar OVER $50 MILLION? be serious.
beyond that, most of the policy proposals involve reprioritizing some tax revenue allocation toward the so-called "freebies"—that is, taking a few billion from defense (still leaving it with several hundred billion) and helping out students with their education. why does that seem weird or a bad idea to you? or to anyone?
and last_NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED ELIMINATING THE 2nd AMENDMENT. EVER. Just common sense regulation—you want a gun? background and mental health check. done. just like we do for any other kind of licensing, like for drivers.
It's still possible Sanders will pick Warren as his VP. It will be a great administration; looking forward to it.
1
@Eugene Debs
Being Sanders' VP is like being McGovern's VP: imaginary
Warren came in third ... in her home state. In 2016, Hillary Clinton beat Sanders there by 17,000 votes. Is it possible that voters simply don’t care for Warren?
16
@Phillip
No, that's ridiculous. Obviously it's misogyny. And a DNC conspiracy. Also, the Clintons. And misogyny again.
More than one thing can be true at the same time.
Sexism played a role. The electability of women was explicitly questioned almost from the beginning, long before the electability of (Dem) socialists, gays, Jews, or 80 year olds was even mentioned. Another factor, for Warren in particular, was the multi-year campaign by Trump/Republican to paint her as extreme. It was a sexist campaign modeled on the multi-decade GOP attacks on Hillary Clinton.
But it is also true that these candidates had flaws and their campaigns made mistakes. I donated to Harris, Castro, Warren, and Buttigieg. I am less than thrilled that my practical options against Trump, the first President elected in his 70s, are two almost-80 year olds. But campaigns are competitions. In the end, these women and all the other men were out-competed.
5
Although this may have been the most diverse field, I just counted from a Wikipedia page the number of men vs women who ran, and 22 men ran and only 6 women ran. That means there was only about a one in five chance a woman would get the nomination. You can dissect the flaws and strengths of all the candidates, but the bottom line is Elizabeth’s fatal mistake was abandoning her unity stance by trying to out-left Bernie, and losing the moderates in the process. That left her competing directly against Bernie, and in the end, there can be only one Bernie. He’s been building a movement for years. Biden rose back up because people understand that Democrats needs the black vote to win, and Biden happens to be the one with deep relationships with that community.
There is a gender question here - why men so outnumbered women in this race, and that gets to how boys and girls are raised. But the question isn’t why people didn’t vote for a candidate who wasn’t the best choice just because she’s a woman.
2
Progress is made just by having so many amazing and diverse people being called for the nomination. I pulled for Amy Klobuchar, and had hopes for Warren as well. HOWEVER, the voters have spoken. Time to completely accept the results and UNIFY, without whining, to defeat the most divisive and dangerous "President" in my lifetime.
5
I think it's time to stop telling our daughters they can be anything. Objectively, that is a lie. Women can't be anything. We are stopped from progressing not just in politics, but in all walks of life. We can tell ourselves our gender is not a barrier, but that just isn't true. Most CEOs are men, we are under represented in all walks of life, not just government. Is it better than it was 30 years ago? Of course, but our old biases remain. Women seeking leadership are just looked upon negatively, because we still see woman as caregivers, as support personnel, not decision makers. Maybe it will change, maybe it won't. But it won't happen in my lifetime.
16
@Katie
Oh, stop with the whining! Women CAN do anything, included being elected President. The fact that Hillary & Liz couldn't do it doesn't mean that other woman can't; Hillary & Liz just weren't good candidates. Does the fact that I can't play for the NBA mean that no white guys can? No, of course not.
I know this: Neither Hillary nor Liz ever sat around wallowing in self-pity like you are now! Get up!
This is truth that people shrink from.
Hillary could have won, if she hadn't come with so much baggage. She is an attorney, she isn't a person you would want to spend much time with, and she doesn't come off as an honest person. Too clever by half I think the British say.
In the relatively distant past, being a woman meant being excluded. Then it meant getting invited to promote diversity but not really listened to. My take on the present is that the situation is better now. We are far more gender neutral. The bar has been raised.
My advice to future candidates would be: demonstrate competence in a way that connects with average people, propose practical ideas that solve problems, build trust and relationships, and don't play off your gender (this turns people off). I work with lots of women and this approach seems to work for them. History has shown that the electorate wants balance and that we don't often elect the smartest person in the room.
4
Around 56 percent of the Democratic electorate is female. I have a tough time getting my head around the concept of an oppressed majority.
11
@GEEBEE
What was it: 51% of white women voted for Trump? How is that "oppression?" Ah, the men in their life told them who to vote for? Always an excuse. Maybe, not all women view the world through the lens of the the NY Times commentariat.
1
Hillary Clinton won many more votes than Trump in 2016. So it has already been done that a woman had the votes to be the president. That the Electoral college system meant the loser is now in the White House is perhaps the structural issue that needs to be resolved for a level playing field in future. And fairer for Americans to get who they really want too, so the focus can move beyond ensuring the smaller rural states get an oversized voice. These aspects go beyond gender but if sorted will mean a better chance for women candidates in the future.
6
Candidates other than Biden and Sanders ran and failed to gain the traction needed to win. The process was open and people of many different ages and races, men and women, all participated. No one was guaranteed success which is as it should be. The people voted and top two remaining contenders are the ones the people chose. And that's it.
4
I voted for Warren yesterday, despite others telling me to focus on who was "electable." She is the most policy-smart, visionary and has serious bonafides in terms of helping average Americans. For a minute, I hoped enough others had used the same measuring stick to cast their ballot. Oh well. It felt good to darken the circle beside her name.
25
I am a Warren supporter but I do not think she has failed to win delegates because she is a woman. It is because her brilliance in policy does not distill down to slogans. Winning the argument is not enough. She needed to be Betsy from Oklahoma instead for Dr. Warren from Harvard. She needed to distill it all down in the way that Sanders and Trump make their positions very simple. Now we have to hope that Biden, who has shown no acumen when it comes to cogent simplicity, can somehow pull it off for a few months.
12
He'll "keep punching" until he gets it. We just condemned ourselves to 4 more years of Trump
It's heartbreaking and absolutely maddening to see competent, capable women bested by good-enough men time after time. In the workplace, in entertainment, in everyday life, and now, repeatedly, in elections. I'm only 26 and I'm exhausted--I don't know how generations of women have done it so long.
29
It was 10:21 pm when I finally was able to vote in California yesterday - in a locked school gym, waiting in a long line....and long after California was called to Bernie Sanders.
I voted for Warren.
19
Michelle writes: "That said, for the party of progress, youth and diversity, a final face-off between two lifelong politicians born during World War II leaves much to be desired." She must be the only person in the country who thinks this is an accurate description of the Democratic Party.
This last time the Democratic Party stood and worked for significant progress was in the 1960s when it was forced to do so by millions of youth and people of color from outside of the party. This also was idiosyncratic because of the temporary national openness for change created by President Kennedy's assassination. Of course, this openness was closed with the assassinations of Malcolm X, Fred Hampton, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Senator Robert Kennedy, and others far less well known.
As far as next time ladies, does anyone think this misogynistic country was actually ready to elect a woman president? The only reason Hillary came close was because she is the wife of a former president of the United States and prepared for her attempt for decades with his support.
What if the Republicans somehow came up with an intelligent, competent woman with moderate conservative views as their candidate. Would Progressive women on the Democratic party side vote for her in support of a female candidate? If only, but would we?
2
@KRB
No.
Maybe is the woman candidate didn't deceive Harvard for decades as a "woman of color" to qualify for many multi hundred thousand dollar consulting contracts, she could build a diverse coalition.
4
I support Elizabeth Warren because she is the best candidate, period. I'm not sure Ms Cottle has been following her campaign that closely because, if anything, Elizabeth leaned hard on her humble Oklahoma background. It was central to virtually every campaign speech she gave. If anything, I think she missed out on emphasizing all of her fantastic ideas. Yes, I think she got politically out-maneuvered over medicare-for-all. But why didn't she say, Hey, child care in this country is too expensive and of too varying quality. I've got a plan for that. She needed to emphasize that she'd thought about the problems many ordinary Americans face and come up with ways of addressing them. I think Bernie beat her on the left because he got into the game four years earlier and built a substantial brand and loyalty. I think Biden & co beat her on the right because, though the country needs 'big structural change', as Warren puts it, when push comes to shove, too many people fear change and just want something supposedly safe and comfortable, ie an old white man with no 'scary' ideas, a known quantity. That's Biden in a nutshell. No woman can ever be a known quantity because there's never been a woman president. For me, Warren was the best candidate of a generation, far better than Hillary in terms of her ideas and plans, and yet the candidate with the best plans got squeezed out of the national debate. It's a sad comment on US politics: We lost with Hillary, so why not go with Joe?!?!?!
15
In the very least, a woman has to be named as running mate for the Democratic ticket this year. We'll take VP as a first step if necessary to eliminate the bigotry of seeing a woman as not presidential. In my opinion, either Warren or Klobuchar have earned the right.
10
@Linda W. Neither has a constituency they would bring along -- people that wouldn't already vote for Biden. Warren or Klobuchar doesn't make sense. I would hope Biden considers Cory Booker, Stacy Abrams, or Val Demings. Does coming in third in your own state earn you the right? Why didn't Pete Buttigieg earn the right?
@Linda W.
Wrong. You aren't entitled to anything based on gender alone. The data is well established that women are just as electable as men when they choose to run. Feminist myths of victimhood, while popular at the NYT, are fake news.
The sexism and bigotry apparent in your comments is making people run from feminists. Your call, but misandry will only help reelect Trump.
@Linda W.
"We'll take VP as a first step..."
Will you know? Are you negotiating? In the case of Liz, what does she have to offer, other than a history of failure, and criticizing Biden and mainstream views? Go ask Bernie if he wants you as his VP; we're all full up here in our conservative boot-licking MSM wine-cave.
I have liked Elizabeth Warren from the Get Go! Smart, Articulate, Passionate, Proactive. I truly believe that if she were male, she would be the runaway favorite to take on Felonious Maximus. More importantly, she is a candidate who seems to embrace the opportunity to solve problems! We need this in our world today. Finally, we will not change anything in our society until we get rid of the inherent corruption. (Thank you Dan Carlin for schooling me on this key point.) Elizabeth Warren is primed and ready to do this. She still has my support, and my humanistic heart.
27
She didn't lose because she's a woman (though I agree that a second X chromosome is still a disqualification for a shrinking but stubborn part of the population).
She lost because, after taking an early lead she tailored her message ONLY to the most woke segments of the party, ignoring even the progressive but not reflexively anti-majoritarian majority of it.
When questioned about diplomacy she would answer that racism was the real issue. When asked about the economy, she would answer that racism was the real issue. When asked about medicare, or immigration, or infrastructure or virtually anything else she came right back to racism.
And, yes, racism is still a problem, but there are a lot of other problems in the world, and Democrats care about those other ones, too.
She didn't give those Democrats the impression she cared about THEM.
6
I would not agree that Ms. Warren's resume outstrips those of many of her male rivals. She was a Harvard professor and a driver of the CFPB and then a senator for 8 years.That's why I chuckle when she calls herself an outsider.
Sanders has been holding or running for federal office since the early 1970s. That's why I chuckle when he calls himself an outsider.
The woman who finally wins the presidency will do it as an individual with unique talents and character. She will not do it merely as a representative of the female gender. That is how Barack Obama became the first black president -- with his own unique gifts.
7
@Beth It's funny how a woman or a black man needs "unique gifts" and "unique talent and character," when it appears any straight, white man in his late seventies is good enough.
America is too scared for big changes, I would defintely be bold and go for Warren and Bernie, both believe solidly in policy and not for business driven politics.
4
I understand the need for politicians to be political but as a voter I am tired of having to vote politically. All the talk of electability, spoilers etc., I just want to vote for the person I think would make the best president. For me that person is Elizabeth Warren. I'm happy to have at least had the opportunity to vote for her in yesterday's primary.
13
(1) In 2018, 63% of eligible women were registered to vote, compared with 59.5% of eligible men (U. S. Census Bureau.)
(2) According to a 2018 Pew Center report, 56% of the women who were registered voters affiliated themselves with the Democratic Party, compared with 44% of the registered men who had similar leanings.
These two facts imply that, let me check my math . . .
(3) 57.4% of all registered democrats are women.
Couple conclusion (3) with the fact that
(4) Women eligible to vote had a higher percentage turnout (55.0%) than eligible men (51.8%) in the 2018 midterm elections (Pew Center report.)
and you could draw the following conclusion:
Women could have decided the gender, and still can decide the name, of the 2020 democratic nominee.
Statistically speaking, of course.
10
I loved Warren. But the dust has settled and it’s time to focus on defeating Trump.
8
Warren has plans, not only Plan A but also Plan B. And those plans are going with her to Congress. Vote Blue and press for good progressive legislation.
7
@AnnaJoy
Does she have a plan for how to get control of the Senate? Because without that, all her plans are just a lot of happy talk.
This would be an excellent year for either Sanders or Biden to choose a highly-qualified running mate. I would be encouraged to vote for a ticket with a female VP. I suspect that many female-belittlers don't even think of the VP anyway in choosing a President. It's fun to state that 80 is the new 70. However, I am in my 70's and I know that Trump, Sanders, and Biden are running close to empty.
10
Please stop with the “we were robbed of our chance” complaints. You make it sound as if women aren't an equal part of the primary process when they absolutely are. And most of them are voting for a non-female whom they feel is the best candidate at this moment. One could easily argue that it is the “women candidate first” pundits who are discounting the decisions of women by decrying their decision. We all know the calculus and goals involved here, so stop complaining and possibly dampening the enthusiasm we need to get every person out to vote for the Democrat we choose to replace Trump.
9
@NoLabels
Well said. No doubt unpopular with the feminist narrative, but nonetheless completely accurate.
1
Warren's appeal is narrow. Now doubt that she would make a better president than either Biden or Sanders. But she will not be a better candidate. And you have to win an election to BE president.
It would be helpful to take note of iconic women national leaders such as Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi or Margaret Thatcher. America has not yet produced a candidate like this, and that may even be a good thing. But the American counterpart might just win.
We are a HUGE nation, with millions of tough, committed, inspiring women. Please excuse me for suggesting that HRC is not among these. Liz Warren arguably is, but she has terrible political instincts. Let's scour the country for hundreds upon hundreds of them, train them for political life, and select those with the greatest personal power and broadest political appeal nest time around.
It is hard to blame misogyny alone when Liz Warren came in third AMONG WOMEN in her own home state.
7
I thought that, with several solid women candidates, this would be the year we finally elected a woman president--especially since this is the 100th anniversary of women getting the right to vote. My wife and I thought that W and K were the two best candidates and deeply regret that we won't get to vote for either of them. We had voted for H in 2016 and for her in the primary in 2018. As a 73-year-old white male, I am embarrassed that one of three old white guys will be elected president this fall, one of whom is as about as defective and despicable as one can be. Let's hope that we at least get a women VP elected this fall.
11
Thanks for putting all of my feelings into this article. It is spot on.
1
This elderly college-educated white man has been a big fan of Elizabeth Warren ever since I saw her in the documentary "Maxed Out" in 2006. Finally, an extremely smart Harvard professor who understands the problems of ordinary working people!
I rooted for her when she decided to run for the Senate, and was delighted when she won. But I felt less comfortable with her decision to run for the presidency, since I was afraid (like so many others) that she would come off as Hillary 2.0. And that seems to be what happened.
But if she had prevailed in the primaries, I would have been ecstatic to vote for her in the general election. Now, after last night, I'm happier than ever that she's still in the Senate, and I hope she stays there to fight for her brilliant vision for this country. (I seriously doubt she'd be Biden's choice for VP.)
14
This undercurrent is not going away and could break higher on the shores anytime this decade, in each branch of government. For example, what happens if DJT and Mike Pence depart office for some reason? You would automatically have a President Pelosi. That’s a present reality and solid start, along with each of these candidates’ bold efforts and Hillary’s before.
2
Maybe those who lament Ms. Warren's failure should look at how sexist (anti-male) she came off during the debates. Rather than uniting democrats, she seemed to me to be advancing a 'women first' agenda, not country and people first. Amy Klobuchar and Kamala Harris exuded strength but evenness when it came to male/female relations. Warren appears to want to man-bash. Her attacks on Bloomberg made splashes in the headlines, and CBS touted it as a big deal in the last debate, but it showed to me a side that was ugly, maybe not as anti-male as Mr. Mysoginist Donald Trump seems anti-female, but still not likeable.
10
@Paul: And here we go with the likeability argument again. We elected someone genuinely and irredeemably repulsive three years ago, but a highly-competent and whip-smart woman like Elizabeth Warren can't be president because she's not likeable. God forbid that a woman might be labeled as difficult or unlikeable. That's the kiss of death. Sigh.
@Allison
You are not wrong that "likeable" should not be the premier test. But seeming to be anti-opposite sex is off-putting. I hope that you reviewed the rest of my comment and not just the last two words.
Just proves that identity politics is a fraud. So many women have voted for Trump, blacks for Biden, women and gays for Biden and Bloomberg should be a signal to the failure of identity politics as assuredly as the primaries yesterday proved that the majority of Democrats want normalcy and not "revolution." I respect Warren, Klobachar and most of the women who had been my Senator or Representative. But enough is enough. I cringe now when I see it being played. A woman will become President one of these days, no question. But it's more likely she will be a Thatcher type who gains the support of Wall Street and the military.
7
Elizabeth Warren keeps taking credit for being tough on Wall Street. But she’s really Wall Streets best friend. While she rails away about lending abuse CEOs use the stock market to fleece the public. Warren isn’t even on the right playing field to fix wealth gap. She’s AWOL on things like: Ben & Jerry’s type CEO compensation (25x ave employee), high frequency trading, advisor fees, etc. Wall Street loves her because she’s playing small ball.
4
Where did you possibly hear that wall street loves her? Are you joking? Back when she was a front runner, there were like 10 different articles in the Times about how wall street was terrified of a Warren presidency.
1
The editor conveniently doesn't mention the numerous competent female leaders leaders past and present throughout the world who overcame all the "forces" stacked against them in much more traditional times and sexist environments. Alchemy of money (Citizens United), familiarity and competence is once again the primary determinant of the results - not the sex of the candidate.
5
@ML Ms. Cottle wouldn't even consider what a disaster of a woman Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York was, forcing the resignation of a very liberal Senator by a scandal of microscopic relevance compared to the dangerous president.
It took a few terms after Al to get JFK. It'll happen.
4
One thing is certain, whoever wins in November, we will have the oldest president in history for the next 4 years.
Time for an age limit? (we already have an age requirement(
3
There is no real reason why an age limit would be necessary. Every adult who has been living in this country (and is a citizen of it) for long enough has the right to run for office.
1
Two things are not going to happen in my lifetime (upper 50s now):
a)The Israeli/Palestinian conflict will not end and,
b) I will not see a female president.
3
1. President Barack Obama
2. Ozymandias by Shelley
3. End of USSR
4. Birth control pill
5. Synthetic biology
So many impossible things sometimes happen. Hang around long enough, be an agent of change, and so far there are no crystal balls of any value, just self-fulfilling prophecies.
1
@Pat
Have faith.
Ivanka in 2024
1
@Pat
a) Of course it won't.
b) Then you are all about victimhood and comparing the two demonstrates that. Despite your rhetorical trick the data has shown that women are just as electable as men when they choose to run. In fact, CNN surveyed that women are 3 times more likely to be sexist and vote for a woman candidate on gender alone than men. Women candidates to date have run bad campaigns and been unable to resist playing the gender card. Until they look less like willing victims and more like leaders you will not see a woman president in your lifetime.
Try telling a black person that it is harder for a woman to get elected president than a black man. Try saying it twice.
1
The misogyny of the United States is continually disappointing, especially as so much of it is from women. Warren was so obviously the best choice I am just disheartened.
12
Why do you think warren was the best choice? Because she is a women? Just because we have not had a women president does not mean the United States is a sexist nation. people need to vote based on credentials rather than gender. We don’t need a woman president. We need a qualified president. It would be nice to have someone for girls to look up to president wise, but it’s not something that’s needed
As Ronald Regan famously said, “There you go again!”
I am profoundly disappointed in Elizabeth Warren. I wanted to support her. But she was too interested in aggrieving herself and left me behind.
People and I are looking for a leader who will point the way. There’s already someone in the Whitehouse who does very well with the politics of grievance. Both Bernie and Elizabeth spend their days whinnying about how terrible the “system” is. Not once have either painted an inclusive picture of what America can look like with either as President. I emphasize inclusive, because I wish I were as wealthy as Mike Bloomberg. And why not? Having an equitable America that works fairly for everyone is what everyone wants. Unfortunately, Warren blew away my good will with her never ending grievances.
For me, the last straw was watching her make a fool of herself going after Mike Bloomberg. Later, in the spin room, when asked if that was a mistake she shot back that she has an issue with Bloomberg and is not given to being reigned in by “handlers”.
That’s right, Liz, you have an “issue” with Mike Bloomberg. Unfortunately, I’m the voter you should’ve been minding. Instead, you reminded me of the First-in-Show Cocker Spaniel who ran down the street chasing after a bicycle!
8
@Vic Of NY Absolutely, perfectly spot on.
2
It is possible that Donald Trump will pick someone like Candace Owens to be his running mate for 2020. Can someone say "landslide"? He would get the red meat base, the black vote and the female vote. Since all the 18-29 year old Bernie supporters will be on their parents basement couch playing video games and eating hot pockets they wont vote. We will finally get a woman (as we should) in the Whitehouse.
1
Why is it that whenever a smart, sharp, articulate candidate like Senator Warren doesn't pan out in the primaries the first and biggest excuse that is listed is because she was a smart, sharp, articulate woman?
Poppycock!!
HRC was all of that AND she won the popular vote in 2016.
Who knows why certain electorates changed their votes in the final hours.
Senator Warren was never my cup of tea. I keep seeing pictures of her, like the one in this article, of her raising a fist and making that face. She reminds me of Bernie Sanders when she does that. I didn't like it when he made those gestures and I certainly didn't care of it when Elizabeth Warren made them. They look like angry hotheads. We already have one in the White House. Do we really need another one?
It used to be said that this country would never elect an African-American for president . . . but we did.
I am convinced we will elect a woman as president in my life time. It just won't be in 2020.
8
Well said. I completely agree.
Don’t women constantly claim that they are better than men in every way? If that is the case, should they not be held at a higher standard?
Jokes aside, last election proved that Americans are willing to vote for a woman. So, Warren’s failure has to do more with her and her policies and not sexism. Every time you fail, you cannot blame in sexism.
7
@Purota Master
Spot on.
I suppose it shouldn't matter, but maybe there is a reason why Ms Warren's business casual attire is consistently suited to a company picnic? I rarely see her in business attire.. . . . not that it should matter.. . .
6
@Lawrence Mixing in a dress or business suit would definitely have helped her appearance and projected a better image.
3
@Lawrence: You have got to be kidding!
I love Elizabeth Warren and would have been very happy to vote for her. I'm not sure why her campaign didn't catch on. I believe her Medicare for All was a strategic mistake, politically speaking, though I wish it were possible to achieve. Mayor Pete's Medicare for All Who Want It seemed more of a winning strategy, and it could be used as a stepping stone to eventually eliminate private insurance companies, just as Sen. Warren wanted to do.
A HUGE thank you to Sen. Warren for creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It was a remarkable achievement in such a business-oriented, corporate controlled government. Just imagine the powerful banksters and other Wall St. interests she managed to overcome. She would have made an excellent president. So would President Hillary Clinton, and of course she actually did win by 3 Million votes despite Trumps conspiracy with Wikileaks and the Russians, the GOP's relentless attacks over Benghazi and her email, and Comey's blunders. Impeached 45 is illegitimate and I will keep saying that until I take my last breath on Earth. Hillary Clinton was America's first female president. Trump is illegitimate and a mob boss.
3
There is no reason why a qualified candidate who happens to be a women can't win the Presidency. So far though every female candidate reminds the electorate about the glass ceiling, women's issues, differences in wages, sexism, and "because I am a women". The President that happens to be a women will will be elected based on how well they know the issues, foreign policy, domestic policy, in other words a "candidate" period.
3
The real mystery to me is less Warren than Klobuchar. Debate after debate my wife and I came away telling each other that Amy was the most effective, impressive, intelligent and balanced (not to mention funny) person on the stage -- only to hear immediately from commentators and the next day from pundits that she had done so poorly! It still puzzles and amazes me, and I can only attribute it to bias -- against a certain kind of woman? Against midwestern "nice"? Against a sense of humor? She's dropped out now, but she's still my favorite -- and I think she would have beaten Trump.
2
Warren is a great candidate but the victim of an entrenched Sanders base of progressives that refuse to be swayed. That left her in a kind of political no man's land caught between moderates voting more towards the centre and progressives who had already pitched their tents in Bernie's camp.
9
Without question, there will be a female VP pick. It's just a question of who. Joe could really shake things up by naming his choice sooner than later.
And watch: Don the Con will drop Pastor Pence in a New York second to pick Nikki Haley.
I'd bet on it, if I had spare to wager, but my money will be going to Dem candidates all over.
8
When the democratic nominee gets elected, bring back Pete, Elizabeth, Amy, Cory, Tulsi. Get them in Cabinet posts. Do not waste them. America has issues not addressed by the current administration, which is busy un-regulating, un-protecting. In general, ruining and destroying those protections which have stood well for our country and citizens.
7
In speech after speech, Warren, Klobuchar, and Gillibrand never missed an opportunity to remind everyone that they were female. But why do this? Doesn't everyone listening or watching already know their gender identity?
Pelosi didn't become Speaker because she reminded everyone each day that she was a woman. It's true that she was elected by her caucus (as opposed to winning a direct vote). Other women leaders (Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, Merkel) were also leaders of their parties in parliament.
Rather than talk about their identities constantly, these politicians should talk about what they would do in office. And if a gender question comes up, they should brush it aside.
7
This lack of presidential candidate diversity only serves to fuel voter apathy. In Tuesday's California Primary Election, in Contra Costa County where I reside, only a paltry 26.91% of registered voters cast a ballot. That's beyond sad.
Senator Warren is sure to bow out of the race. To think in 2020 that voters will only have the choice of voting for either of 2 old white men for president (considering the 2 major political parties) in November is so very disheartening.
I can only hope the eventual Democratic Presidential Candidate will embrace diversity with his VP selection.
Paging Michelle Obama ...
2
The winnowing of the women candidates may end up being a very fortunate accident. The next four years beginning January 20, 2021 will be all about repairing the essential infrastructure and morale of the Federal Government. 2024 promises a much better opportunity to push for more progressive agendas and reforms. Never go to battle with exhausted troops if it can be helped.
280
@Schimsa I love this take. Thank you.
22
@Schimsa The implication being that women are not capable of "repairing the essential infrastructure and morale of the federal government?" Huh.
86
@Schimsa Very optimistic - but unlikely. Both of the major parties are dominated by white men - and they have no interest in changing this. Biden can't even apologize for his past behavior. The video he offered up to address this is a textbook example of how people in power simply deflect and reframe their sexist behavior. No - Biden will not continue to purposely undermine women, but he won't do much to improve things. And him being in office will very clearly reveal to the public that it was ok for him not to support Anita Hill, that is was ok for him to smell women's hair,... Trump models misogyny - Biden will model a less obnoxious form of misogyny.
48
I have been a Warren supporter for quite a while. It seems evident to me that she is the most capable, thoughtful, passionate and substantively articulate of all the candidates.
She lost because she didn't hammer home and sell the message prime message of the hour... that she was the one who could unite the party and beat Donald Trump.
That case is based on ...
-she knows how to deliver progress with the free market economic engine ("capitalist to my core") and within our institutions and norms.
- progressive could back her because she has their objectives and has shown she can get things done;
-the centrists can back her because she is pragmatic and wants reform not revolution.
- She has the least baggage of anyone running, the mud slung being of trivial nature, and doesn't need to get in complex explanations of the evolution of the term "socialism".
- She has demonstrated that she has the energetic debating and confrontation skills that give confidence in taking on con men.
- She certainly demonstrates decency, compassion, and integrity.
Unfortunately, she didn't clearly make that case when the Democratic voters, indeed the entire nation is desperate to restore democracy with decency and honor, and cleanse White House of the fetid swamp Trump brought in. They turned to a much less capable, familiar figure they guess is safe.
7
The prevailing consideration seems to be that Joe Biden is the strongest candidate to defeat Trump. The fact that Trump got himself impeached while trying to sabotage Biden's candidacy says it all. Biden makes Trump very nervous.
Biden might strengthen his chances further by nominating Amy Klobuchar to run as VP. (Warren is still needed in the Senate). I would also like to see Kamala Harris as Attorney General, and Pete Buttigieg somewhere in the White House.
I do see a woman as VP, and Klobuchar seems the most likely candidate. She would also give us peace of mind as a younger candidate, well positioned to succeed Biden in the event that he decided to run for only one term.
7
Stop calling Bernie a white man.
He’s an Ashkenazi Jew. They are not the same thing. White men tried to exterminate Jews, and many still hate Jews, as Charlottesville, Pittsburgh, and Poway demonstrated.
The actual color of his skin is irrelevant. What is relevant is the history of his people.
7
Thank you! So true. He’d be our first Jewish President which is great
@Mark Do you have light-colored skin? Or do people mistake you for a dusky German person? Half of my family are Ashkenazi Jews with light skin, my half-sister is half-black and is mistaken for Latina more often than not. Her children are black. None of the people in my colorful family would dare to insist that the color of someone's skin is irrelevant in this country.
1
So very tired of old white men.
7
Clearly there is racism, yet Obama was elected twice. He had the advantage of running through the economic ruins of the W administration, but I believe Obama had the confidence, vision, intelligence and star quality to dazzle the public and inspire their faith in him as a leader.
Clearly there is also sexism, yet I believe a female candidate with the right qualities at the right time (soon!) will win. Is there anything we can learn from the examples of national leaders like Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher and others? Or for that matter, from HRC's popular victory and electoral loss?
I think it applies to Warren as well as to Sanders that they're typecast as outsiders, protestors and insurgents. Their challenge, which they seem to understand, is to make the case that they speak (and listen) to the heart of America. That's a hard case to make when you're attacking the status quo in a wholesale way.
Even progressives need bridges more than walls.
2
Warren lost her bid the day she raised her hand and supported eliminating private insurance instead of more easily digested public option slow roll.
That’s why she lost- Americans say they want change but they only want it in little baby steps.
2
The coverage made sidelining of Warren post SC a self-fulfilling prophecy. Bernie, contrary to his "they are out to get me" claims, has always had twice the number of detractors as supporters. Warren was wrongly associated with him and the race talked about as two buckets of candidates. All of it smacks of sexism. She offered a third path and has a talent for leadership. If the media hadn't kept the fear of sexism and actually sexism alive, we might have a three way race and the option to chose some one who can actually be an effective leader.
6
When the race started, I thought the top four candidates, in terms of smarts, integrity, political skill and potential for strong leadership were all women. And I was reasonably confident all would have flummoxed and defeated Trump. Bernie and Joe were at the bottom of my list. But as it wasn't to be, and I can see why.
So, as an old "straight white septuagenarian" I'd like to impart a little my wisdom. This race is about anger, fear and disgust; anger about the hole we've put young people in, anger about the golden years many middle aged working people have come to realize they are not going to have, fear of what the future will bring for minorities if Trump remains in office, the disgust of many folks in the suburb with the spectacle of Donald Trump.
Bernie is the angry guy, and he got the angry vote, including many young Latinos who have a lot to be angry about. Black Americans were proud of Obama, as they should be, but they are also painfully aware of what followed Obama. They wanted somebody they knew, somebody safe, and were shy about another first if increased the risk of getting four more years of Trump.
The folks in the suburbs were looking for a not-Trump, not a revolution. The women candidates had support in the suburbs, but as the women fell away they were left with Joe - who doesn't yell or shake his fist and is a good antidote to their disgust for Trump.
The bright side, there are four highly qualified women available for the Vice President slot.
7
Ms. Warren has nobody to blame but herself. The way she went after Bloomberg both times turned alot of people off.
I'm not a Bloomberg supporter but she thought doing that would help her. It did not.
7
@Glenn S.
That's the conundrum, Glenn. If a woman is nice, she is perceived as weak, if she hits hard she is perceived as you know what.
That's why there is no winning in politics, as there is no winning in the corporate world. We have a very very long way to go.
6
@Pat: It always boils down to whether a woman is nice, doesn't it? In another comment, a person took issue with the photo of Warren featured in this article. We have men on both sides of the aisle who point, chop, growl, scowl, grunt, yell, and ridicule, but Elizabeth Warren is photographed raising her fist with an awkward look on her face, and she's deemed unelectable. I was raised by both my parents to believe that women could do anything they wished to do in life, but every other comment in this article proves to me that that's a pipe dream. It makes me weep for my daughter, who is entering a male- dominated profession. I wonder if she'll ever receive the respect she deserves. At this point, I'm doubtful.
3
@Allison My comment had nothing to do with her being a male or female. She took two cheap shots at Bloomberg and it cost her. I would have said the same thing if it was a guy.
Americans gravitate to "likable" presidential candidates they want to talk to over their back fence or have a beer with. Not "lecturers". Exhibit 1: Bush vs Gore. Exhibit 2: Reagan vs. Carter. And there does seem to be a growing backlash against intellect and educational attainment. Yes, sexism likely hurt Warren, but so did all these other attitudes. The final blow--her attempts at honesty about how all the "free stuff" was going to be paid for. Sanders supporters do not want to confront the reality of how other countries actually fund these benefits, including high income taxes on middle class folks and exorbitant taxes on everyday purchased goods. Warren has been savaged by the Bros for suggesting their candidate's weaknesses. Too bad she didn't turn all that Bloomberg vitriol on Bernie and really pull back the curtain.
1
Perhaps the woman who finally breaks through this particular glass ceiling will resemble Obama more than Clinton or Warren. Obama did not so much triumph over racism as artfully evade its full force, and in dealing with American misogyny, a similar evasion may be needed by a successful woman candidate. Obama fit none of the stereotypes of the African-American activist. His politics were barely left of center, and more important perhaps, his famously cool demeanor was about as far as anyone can get from the image of activist intensity that Jesse Jackson and others of his generation evinced. No white Harvard professor descended from those who arrived on the Mayflower could have expounded a political argument with more grace and less wrath. The double standard for anyone who seeks the Presidency who is other than white may well be as strong as ever. But Obama still succeeded. The thought that a woman might need a counter-stereotypical persona as well as preternatural poise in order break through is depressing, but it occurred to me when I watched Warren’s masterly demolition of Mike Bloomberg in his first, disastrous debate. Indignation often seems to be be simmering in the background when Warren speaks, and when that emotion moves to the foreground, it can be a glorious sight to behold for some of us. But I wondered that evening how Bloomberg’s humiliation would play throughout the rest of the country. The answer became clear soon enough.
3
I am not sure we can put Warren's loss down to gender as much as we can put it down to her sweeping policy change plans. After the last four years, people are ready for calm and boring. There will be a time when people are ready for change. Right now, they just want some normalcy. Klubachur less so. I really believe that was about electability. People didn't want to chance anything that might keep Trump, so gender there was probably the determiner. JM2C
1
I agree with other commenters who have noted that the American electorate is as a whole extremely immature and unsophisticated. Sounds ridiculous, but I honestly believe the lavender fleece and golden retriever, coupled with transparency about her policies and an uncreative digital strategy, hurt the otherwise brilliant Ms. Warren. To be the first woman to pave the way, I believe one needs to exude considerable sex appeal, digital savvy, charisma and creativity, fashion sense, and finally, perfect professionalism and sound leadership abilities. It’s going to be the toughest ceiling to crack but it will be done.
1
Elizabeth Warren would be a phenomenal head of the SEC, FED or Treasury in a Biden administration.
3
Former Colorado congresswoman Pat Schroeder considered a presidential bid in 1988. When asked why she would run as a woman she responded with: Do I have a choice?
284
@berman One of my political heroes.
26
@berman -- Thank you for mentioning Schroeder! Also relevant: Schroeder ran (or more accurately, attempted to run) shortly after Ferraro was the VP nominee in 1984. As a result of Ferraro's recent loss, Schroeder faced doubts about electability that are strikingly similar to the doubts about female presidential candidates right now, in the aftermath of Clinton's 2016 loss. Check out this article: https://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/22/us/schroeder-s-potential-candidacy-is-dominating-women-s-political-caucus.html?searchResultPosition=8
2
@berman If only we could time-warp the Pat Schroeder of 1988 forward to today. She'd win.
1
i love elizabeth warren, despite her quirks, and gave her as much money as the law allows.
for a first time candidate, she did amazingly well. kudos.
she's not done, and she should go to the convention with every delegate she has and be nominated from the floor as a gesture of gratitude.
biden will need someone to put fire in his geriatric capabilities and unite the two sides of the party. if biden selects klobuchar then we will just have midwest velveeta on old white bread.
not sure what that gets you, but i am sure it does not get you substantive change.
3
As a male, I think this is an important discussion to have this discussion. I do wonder if I am quicker to identify flaws among female candidates than among males, although I will say that every single Dem candidates has a weakness of some kind for me - too left, too inexperienced, too rich etc etc
Amidst all the handwringing, it should be remembered that the Democrats did nominate a woman to be president in in 2016 and she did win the popular vote with some ease.
Perhaps Democrats were spoiled by having Obama as president, because he was a singular candidate who seemed able to bridge the unconscious racism of American voters, although he ran into plenty, conscious or otherwise, while in office.
Like it or not, it is going to take a similarly singular (if that's not a grammatical error) female candidate to take the presidency.
7
Just over one-third of the delegates have been selected. There is still a distance to go. Who's to say that either Sanders or Warren might not leap ahead?
Warren is definitely the smartest and most accomplished candidate, just by the fact that she got the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, her idea, made a reality. This organization has clawed back about 12 billion for consumers that have been defrauded and cheated.
7
Yes and that's a shame. She tried two cheap shots on Bloomberg and it cost her .
2
Bernie Sanders likes to remind us that many other countries have achieved universal healthcare. Many other countries, both developed and less developed, have also managed to elect female leaders. Kate McKinnon playing Elizabeth Warren on SNL exclaimed, "If you think I'm unelectable, elect me!" Somehow, voters in this country are too timid to do that.
7
I'm sorry I don't remember who said this to a group of women but I won't forget it. "There are no glass ceilings, just layers and layers of men."
7
I supported Harris and would be thrilled to see her as a VP candidate (which I do think is going to happen). Or Stacy Abrams, also possible. I'd love Liz Warren to either stay in the Senate where she's done great work, or maybe in a high level cabinet post. I'm a 67 year old white guy, and I'm more than ready for a woman President.
2
This election isn't normal. The goal of Democrats is to get rid of Trump. We're willing to sacrifice a lot to beat Trump.
Elizabeth Warren had several issues that reminded me of Hillary. Elizabeth had several issues in her past that made easy fodder for Trump (although most candidates do). She seemed to be more concerned with bashing Bloomberg's actions against women at the debate than she was in saying what she planned to do as president. It came across as us women against you men. I didn't really like her focus, and I'm imagining lots of men didn't either. Like Hilary, she isn't natural when she tries to be approachable. Presidential elections are somewhat of a popularity contest so these things matter.
Separately, she's also a bit too progressive for this election for me. I want someone who will appeal to independents, and she can too easily be tarred by the socialism brush.
On both scores, I thought Amy was the better candidate if we wanted to have a woman candidate.
I don't know why we ended up with two old white guys, but I will say that not every Democratic presidential candidate has to be an underrepresented person. I am just crossing my fingers that the 70+ year old guys who keep going to hang out with large crowds of people don't succumb to coronavirus.
4
@Jane Smith Hillary was much more likable, poised, and presidential than Warren.
3
@Asher
"Hillary was much more likable, poised, and presidential than Warren."
Which Hillary was that?
Many of the comparisons about résumés are just hogwash. AOC is seen by many as a brilliant and transformational politician at age 36, with 13 months of elected office experience -- do you think for a second she wouldn't be on the short list for VP if she was Pete Buttigieg's age?
It isn't about gender...not this time. You want compare resumes? How about Steve Bullock? John Hickenlooper? Jay Inslee? If anything, Harris was in the race longer than those white men BECAUSE she is African American and female, not despite it.
Warren's mistake was to fail in differentiating herself from the already-established Bernie on policy grounds. Klobuchar's mistake was in not having any actual signature ideas or proposals, and on having the baggage of stories (never refuted and in fact seemingly confirmed by her) about mistreatment of staff. It ain't rocket science, and it ain't gender.
2
She's "the church lady" without the church..
However, I would give anything to watch her dismantle Trump on a debate stage. A tough and fair politician- she fought hard to implement the Consumer Protection Bureau; she truly is a person who fights for the working class of this country.
At minimum- Warren deserves a Cabinet Post !!
8
The people I voted for as the Democratic nominee in the last four primaries were a black man, the same a black man, a white woman who would have been a septuagenarian a few months after taking office (Clinton), and a septuagenarian white woman (Warren). One of them won the presidency twice and another won the popular vote by a large margin. I watched in joy as a gay Mayor did better that any Mayor has done in any Presidential Primary in living memory. Even through we are now a party that is strongly trending towards great diversity, I hope that as an inclusive party we also allow that people with long experience (old), and who happen to be white, or even men, might occasionally be the consensus choice.
5
As a 70-something woman entrepreneur (retired) who started and ran my own successful business for 40 years in a competitive, male dominated field (advertising, design & marketing communications), I have an informed opinion on why many women — even outperformers, even feminists — worry about the electibility of women.
It’s simple. We know our own lived experience.
We know how much energy, heart, and defying of the odds it took us to succeed. We’ve lived in the zone of that enormous gap between people’s — and institutional — declared support of gender equality and their actual real-life behavior. We’ve been passed by and passed over while hearing our praises sung at the very same time. And when we’ve been so superior at what we do that we’ve propelled ourselves into the winner’s circle, we’ve often been viewed not as a normal, merit-based success, but rather as a phenomenon. As an exception to the rule — the rule that men are naturally built to lead and women aren’t.
Is the world truly different now from my own lived experience? I hope to God it is. But the evidence is still spotty. And I can understand why some, maybe many, women worry about the risk of testing gender equality in such an existential race as the 2020 Presidential election. I hope I live to see this dilemma eradicated forever.
5
In the UK we have had two female Prime ministers. Two very different people but one thing that united them: they both were on the right.
I bet that the first woman President in the US (unless she inherits the position as vice) will be on the right. Holding conservative positions neutralizes the perception of female negatives when it comes to high office.
5
It’s heartbreaking that the women didn’t survive this ordeal. It’s also heartbreaking that the candidates of color didn’t make it. That being said, I tried, really tried hard, to get behind Warren. I joined her campaign and was gung-ho but then she kept losing me. I felt she was lecturing. I felt she was treating her crowds like they were children. I got tired of her “breathless oh so sincere” voice and tear jerking stories which got to be old. And I really got tired of the Medicare for All. It is an unreasonable and dislikable plan; Americans are not and will not be behind it. So today, she needs to bow out and support Biden. Elizabeth, we hope you will join forces with the others so that we can get our country back. Getting rid of Trump takes energy from all of us.
4
@Hortencia So how do we get affordable care? I'll have to work until I die because of that.
1
Warren came in 3rd in her home state - the people who knew her best. No candidate did more permanent damage to their own political future than the MA Senator.
7
Could we all please take a minute and decide to respect everyone's choice for who they'd like to be the democratic nominee for president?
Sanders' supporters are quick to label every loss as a vast conspiracy against Sanders.
Warren's supporters are quick to see every loss as a vast display of sexism against Warren.
Neither is true. Voters picked who they wanted to face Trump and who they wanted as president. Nothing more. If the democratic party is good at one thing, it is tearing itself apart. This time, let's try to keep it together.
10
The two most competent Presidential candidates in the last four years are Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren. They would have made the best US President with the possible exception of Mayor Pete.
7
Warren should not drop out until she has a conference across all cable news stations, or gets a stage at the convention. And here's what she needs to say:
- I did more for the American people than all of the other Democratic candidates left in this race combined through the CFPB and TARP, even though I have served decades less time in politics than Sanders or Biden.
- I have brought multiple fierce advocates for consumer rights into Congress, who will continue to fight for working class Americans.
- My 3rd place finish in Iowa was ignored by every facet of the news media, thus starting the Primary campaign season with news stories of me already failing. I beat Joe Biden - you ignored it.
- It was my evisceration of Bloomberg in Nevada that led to such a large surge towards Biden. I am the only candidate who has got the guts to take a billionaire businessman head on and win a debate.
- I was never allowed to be praised or stand on my own footing in the media. Even when The New York Times published their picks for President, they refused to nominate one candidate, giving neither an edge. Both were women.
And lastly, I have been pressured to drop out of the race by supporters of multiple candidates since Fall of 2019. Many of these attacks were nasty and published on social media, making my own supporters fear for my electability.
No woman candidate will be electable until after one is actually elected. And for that to happen, you have to actually vote for her.
9
@Kayla K
You should definitely be her media strategist. Completely tone-deaf, and disconnected from reality. Thinking like this is exactly why she lost.
I am beyond disappointed. Devastated. All I heard when HRC was running was I'm not sexist I'd vote for Warren in a heartbeat. Yet the moment she did run, all I hear is the same exact accusations, shrill, schoolmarmish, even crooked, liar, and only motivated by her political career. It is just nuts.
The number of people who say I was for Warren until, until she moderated on this policy or until she confronted Bloomberg or until blah de blah blah... only confirm the idea that women are judged on their flaws and men their potential, even if they are 78 years old. Even if they are 78 and had a heart attack. All we can see with men are their potential.
Both Biden and Bernie have made grave missteps in regards to sexism and race and yet those don't count against them. Both have some truly questionable takes in the past. Can anyone say crime bill? (That was supposed to be the unforgivable reason not to vote for HRC because she once said super-predetor in a speech about it. Yet the two men who voted for the bill are not tagged about it at all. Bloomberg escalated stop and frisk and its oh ho hum, but Warren investigating her heritage well that's unacceptable racist. I mean c'mon people.
And how can a man whose been in national office for 35 years get tagged as the outsider while a woman whose been there much shorter be considered too establishment? Even being effective counts against women too! People don't want Hermione pundits say because women can't be smart and passionate?
893
@NSH
Stick with Warren.
Biden can't win White House without anti-establishment votes and Sanders can't win nomination without her supporters/delegates.
He needs to join forces with her and put the DNC on notice that hi-jacking the primary race and not letting it play was a fatal move.
I am tired of the corrupt, double-dealing within the party and different standards women candidates are held by.
39
@NSH HRC was by far the most qualified candidate of my lifetime. This field is the dullest ever. I'll pull the Dem lever but Biden will just be Mr. Same Old. I'm for Bernie if for no other reason I hope he burns the party down and we can rebuild around younger politicians. I'm in my 60s and the thought of voting for someone 20 years older than me is depressing.
44
@NSH Warren presented a less pragmatic, more extreme version of herself.
Still, if it's sexism, it's sexism by women against a woman candidate. The majority of votes cast were by women. Discounting Tulsi Gabbard who is not a serious candidate, Warren was the only viable woman still in the race yet couldn't log even 15% of the votes in most states and finished 3rd in her home state. MA is the most liberal state in the nation, yet her message couldn't sell there. It was just too many free government giveaways, which Warren unconvincingly claimed would require no middle class tax increase, with the top 0.1% carrying the freight, based on a 2%/6% wealth tax, which this Supreme Court was certain to find unconstitutional.
Warren used to be a serious politician. This year she simply wasn't.
18
I am a conservative that will happily vote for a woman for President and would like Trump to consider a woman VP for the 2020 election. I will also vote for a moderate Democrat woman as President. As for Elizabeth Warren, I thought she was great at debates and either delusional or a liar with respect to her ideas about her socialist regressive agenda and its cost to everyone.
There are highly successful businesswomen who are fully qualified to run as President. The Democrats should try one of them next time. If one of them was running in this election, I would dump Trump with no reservations. And no more law professors.
1
Elizabeth Warren's gender is of no issue to me. I don't want to see a woman in the White House just for the sake of it being a woman. I want the best person for the job. For a long time, I felt that person was Elizabeth Warren. Then she called for gay reparations (I'm not anti-gay by any stretch, I'm anti-reparations for anything because it will solve nothing), and for stating that her choice of secretary of education must be approved by a trans youth. She lost total credibility and support from me for her pandering to the extreme "progressive" left.
6
I believe Warren would have made the best president. It puzzled me when she positioned herself as a Sanders disciple. She is so much more than that. We liked her precisely because of the things that the Sanders people have pilloried her for. On this site, anyway, some of the Sanders people have been particularly vicious toward her. I guess that puts the lie to their 2016 use of the "just not that woman" trope. The whack-a-mole misogyny of the Sanders campaign was not insignificant. It was a window into the heart of one part of the Sanders base, the part that mocks and disparages claims of sexism but then says it is only joking.
7
For those disappointed that it appears that a woman won't head the Democratic ticket this election cycle, take heart!
It is still possible!
Bernie Sanders!
OK, just an "honorary woman", but still...
1
What's the matter with you? I am not a Bernie fan but you are out of line.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing Bernie in a dress.
Being cleft instead of combed is not a virtue. Certainly not a virtue that warrants the Oval Office.
Run as the "woman's candidate," get trampled as such. (Is Biden running as the "man's candidate?")
Warren was too left, Klobuchar had little name-recognition beyond the tundra and Kamala Harris is fading in popularity in her home state. All these women looked great on paper but nothing more.
A woman who proclaims she intends to be "America's first female president" as much as says she has nothing to offer but novelty. Novelty worked for Obama, who turned out to be a mediocre president, but Barak was likable.
3
Whatever the mysterious reasons (or non-reasons) for Elizabeth Warren's electoral situation, the obvious remains:
Liz is simply the best President running.
I'm disappointed in Democrats & their terror of what Republicans will say.
Lurching to the 'safe' so-called center has been a disastrous gambit for Democrats in the past.
Whatever their reasons, 'establishment Democrats' have exposed themselves as an ugly, snooty, divisive cabal, not at all in line with the unity, intelligence & compassion Madame Speaker Pelosi beseeches them to strive for.
The coordinated propaganda offensive launched against Sanders by Democrat-party 'influencers' on twitter, like Jon Cooper & Don Winslow, exceeded in its vitriolic subterfuge even the auto-tweeting Trumpian hate-machine manned by their miserably mean equivalents on the redstate troll-bot farm.
How hard will this attack against the only real popular passion for progress backfire on the Democrats in November & down-ticket? For all of our sakes, we hope 'blue no matter who' resonates with the youth inspired by Sanders.
But after that self-destructive blitz against them by the DNC, or whomever coordinated this ambush, I'd not be surprised if many want nothing to do with Democrats, ever.
Back to Liz:
I apologize on behalf of my Compatriots in my sovereign Blue State of Massachusetts. They were intentionally driven to terror by the Democratic establishment, who in its own foolish fears, resorted to its failed strategy of appeasement.
5
Considering she blatantly lied about her ethnicity, I don't get how she was even considered a candidate to begin with. Tulsi was the far superior female in this race, it's just that she didn't play ball with the establishment. Pelosi got her wish and consolidated. If Biden loses against Trump, it's on her. I'm not voting if Bernie isn't the nominee. Should be enough of you guys voting to beat Trump, anyways.
4
@Chad.
That’s what people thought the last time: ‘Bernie or bust’ & that their protest vote wont make a difference.
Well, it was bust. And by less than 100k votes in MI, WI and PA. am a Bernie supporter, and contributor, but the possibility of four more years of trump is terrifying. I can’t tell you what to do, but I WILL support whoever the nominee is.
And if you are in a swing state and want to make a trade (a protest vote for a blue vote), I’m happy to make that trade.
2
Getting yelled at by Bernie Sanders isn't the worst thing that could happen to us. The reelection of Donald Trump is the worst thing that could happen to us.
Vote.
5
Michelle is right. Democrats fell for the GOP trap of distancing ourselves from promising women to elect very old men who may not even live past their first term.
But that's the gamble voters wanted to make to avoid fascism, which may end up working against their favor since the Trump base is united more than ever. Sigh...
3
If Ms. Warren had the political talent of Angela Merkel , or Christina Kirchner, she would be leading the field by now.
Both Ms Warren, and Ms Clinton are highly accomplished and smart, but that does NOT translate to be a good politician.
More is required - most of all the ability to connect to voters of all stripes. Bill Clinton had , and he never, ever showed how smart he was (a Rhodes scholar, no less). Rather he greeted everyone he met like a long lost friend.
7
Biden will get my vote even if he doesn't pick a female running mate. I, too, was a Sanders supporter (for years) but this is no time to get picky.
3
A woman, as well spoken as JFK, and as physically attractive, a Senator, with family money backing her, would win. No doubt about it. In this land of 360 million, she must be out there somewhere, ready to start the road to the presidency.
2
@JimVanM
Likely, the future president is a little girl who crossed pinkies with Elizabeth Warren and heard her say that she ran for president "because that's what girls do."
My wife and I fell for Senator Warren after watching her at a town hall back in June. She was and remains the most qualified candidate for president. Anyone who watched her on the debate stage had to be impressed with her mental agility and toughness. Her command of the facts was unparalleled and her commitment to the ideals she espoused was unassailable. I still wear my Obama button and will do the same with my Warren one. Sadly, we won't have our best candidate leading the charge. But I am heartened knowing she will bring her considerable resources to the battle to reclaim America.
7
I'm a Sanders supporter, have been since 2016, but Biden will get my primary vote if he picks a female running mate.
149
@Nikki He'll get my vote if he goes with Warren. Anyone else is more of the same.
13
@Nikki
Candidates don't typically announce their VP candidate until well after the primaries.
19
@Nikki
I am an Elizabeth Warren supporter, but will probably cast my primary vote now for Sanders. Biden was, after all, the candidate so weak he did not make much of a showing in the first three state elections, and was protected by his staff from press exposure because he was so weak. I will vote for him in November if I have to, but I think we still may find out -- maybe too late -- that Biden is not much more than smoke and mirrors and a lot of cosmetic surgery.
18
We had in 2016 a highly articulate, accomplished, capable woman who won the popular vote for President. She could run rings around Biden and Sanders. Not only did the ridiculous Electoral College do her in, but Republicans were so overwhelmingly successful in demonizing her that many Democrats today make a sour face when her name is mentioned.
Let those thoughts sink in for a moment.
10
"Man or woman, winning the presidency is not merely — or even largely — a question of merit. Americans are forever seeking that indefinable spark — a secret blend of strength and likability, authority and relatability, a talent for inspiring and connecting with voters."
It is really pathetic that in so many situations in the USA "cool" wins out over "capable". Imagine if this was how your favorite football team was managed. The best players on the sidelines and the cooler, funnier, better looking, hipper, most popular players on the field. This does not sound like a championship strategy to me.
We get what we deserve, the lowest common denominator. It is painful to watch.
8
I think the reason Warren lost is because she was always saying "fighting" whatever the connotation may be. That does not resonate well during Trump presidency when we are tired of all the barbs, attacks, insults, and angry rhetoric. It turned me off completely from Warren and I supported Mayor Pete. Yes, no female candidates in 2020 for president. I think the GOP is grooming Nikki Haley. The Dems female candidates should be thinking carefully for 2024 if they finally want a woman president.
3
That's two prime opportunities missed for America to elect a woman President. This, and Trump's surprisingly strong support suggests that the country is still a long way from being led by a woman. A matter of some shame I would say.
3
Don't look at me. I voted for Gabi.
3
lower standards, eh?
Give it a break. There is the oft cited 3 million votes from last election.
I believe Warren stood a better chance in 2016 than in 2020. She would have been the candidate of change in an election that screamed bloody murder for change. Instead she kowtowed to Clinton-Obama, Inc. and declined to run. She missed her shot.
There is no doubt that there will be a female President one day. No doubt at all. It will happen when the right candidate comes along at the right time. She must then campaign on ideas... not on being a woman.
As Barack Obama put it, I am running for President and I happen to be black. I am not campaigning as a black who wants to be President.
4
@Concernicus Biden also declined to run in 2016. If he had, we might be looking at a very different scenario. NOW he wants his shot, when he's very old (I don't mean his chronological age, I mean his cognitive loss), caught up with Hunter's messy life, and unable to articulate a healthcare plan of his own separate from Obamacare.
It'll take the perfect, Obama-style campaign for a woman to reach the White House. Old white men can evidently make several serious errors, or exhibit various alarming qualities, and still be considered viable candidates.
That said, my gut feeling is that the Democrats are in the process of choosing the weakest of their major candidates. Maybe they should call themselves the Conservative Party from now on. After all, it's the Republicans who've gone rogue.
7
I’m a center right independent who was quite taken with Senator Warren early on. Her work in establishing the CFPB against entrenched interests very much impressed me. If she were the Democratic candidate, I’d vote for her. But she blew it. She tacked too far left in trying to out-Bernie Bernie. More importantly, she had no joy in campaigning. Her persona was that of a scold; witness her evisceration of Bloomberg at the SC debate. Politics is more than policy. Her interview with Chris Matthews was a fitting swan song for them both.
5
Warren seems to be between the devil and deep blue sea. His chances of a sudden rush of popularity is remote and in view of her showing in her home state of Massachusetts she may have trouble winning her seat back int the senate next time reelection time rolls around. Back to professorship at Harvard? That's a tough decision if they consider the possibility that not many students may not sign up for her glasses. This showing could restrict her future. Good thing she's retirement age.
2
Many other countries, including developing ones, have long had powerful women leaders. Is this more of a US issue then ?
6
Sen. Warren lost when she went too far over health care. If she had said - we are going to build a public health care system that is better than you have now, will cost less, and give you an opportunity to choose, instead of what the public heard as -the government is going to force you give up what you have, she would been seen as doing what the public wants. The message went well with the people well to the left but lost the middle. As was demonstrated on Tuesday the middle votes. It would be great if she became Secretary of the Treasury and Klobuchar VP.
5
My biggest issue with Senator Warren is that I always felt like she was chastising or scolding rather than informing her audience of various policy changes she had in mind. So often it felt like she was talking at rather than with potential voters.
And frankly, hearing another one of her homespun tales of when she was young began to grate on my nerves. I didn't like it when HRC did it and I liked it even less when Senator Warren did it.
If Senator Warren had won the nomination, I would have voted for her. But she was never my top choice nor anywhere close to the top.
I hope she remains in the Senate because I think she is an incredibly hard working and dedicated Senator. I just never wanted her as my president.
9
@Marge Keller What great reasons to not support a well-qualified candidate who'd make an excellent president, I'm sure you're so proud/happy she failed! Like I said before, we only get the leaders we deserve.
10
Did you like it when Obama did it?
I know, the women and the homespun tales thing is so annoying. Oh yeah, thats right, all politicians do that. OK Marge.
1
It's very difficult for most men to hold women equal to themselves. Men do the lip service of pretending that they do, but we all know they are lying. Males need to feel dominate, in charge and superior to females. They need to harness that feeling of superiority to feel good about themselves.
I am extremely proud to be an Elizabeth Warren supporter. She is by far the most qualified, intelligent and capable person running for President. Elizabeth can run rings around Biden and Sanders with her eyes closed. If Elizabeth ends her race now, she is still a winner in my book. If Elizabeth wants to run to the end of the race, then I will support her 100%.
Thank you Elizabeth Warren for standing up and fighting for America. You are an amazing woman and an inspiration to all. Team Warren!
20
@Valerie
"Males need to feel dominate, in charge and superior to females."
Very true. But by the same token, many women insist on being only with a man who takes charge, and disdain a man who won't.