Current Affairs The 2020 United States Presidential Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
RAFUH said:
Having any female (or anyone not a white Christian male really) run after Obama was never going to go well.
Way too much change for a sadly large part of the country.
Click to expand...

Not really. In 2016, slightly more women voted for her than they did for Obama, but black people voted for her much less than then did for Obama. What swung 2016 was Trump playing strong to his base and Clinton not playing strong to hers.

Why Biden is doing so well currently isn't because he's a perfect candidate - instead, it's that Trump has enthused the anti-Trump "base" so hard that Biden could be anyone and he'd get their vote, and Trump has saw his own base erode enough to suggest almost a landslide loss. Everyone who voted for Trump to "see what he could do" have now seen what he does and went back the other way.

If a female had run this time, she'd be in the same place against Trump as Biden is now - or to be honest, she'd be better off. Clinton lost because she was Clinton, not because she was a woman.
 
Tubey said:
Not really. In 2016, slightly more women voted for her than they did for Obama, but black people voted for her much less than then did for Obama. What swung 2016 was Trump playing strong to his base and Clinton not playing strong to hers.

Why Biden is doing so well currently isn't because he's a perfect candidate - instead, it's that Trump has enthused the anti-Trump "base" so hard that Biden could be anyone and he'd get their vote, and Trump has saw his own base erode enough to suggest almost a landslide loss. Everyone who voted for Trump to "see what he could do" have now seen what he does and went back the other way.

If a female had run this time, she'd be in the same place against Trump as Biden is now - or to be honest, she'd be better off. Clinton lost because she was Clinton, not because she was a woman.
Click to expand...
I dunno,
I think biden would have won the rust belt states 4 years ago.
I think a lot of blue collar labor types would have voted for him that would never vote for a woman.
Same will happen this time, Biden will do better than any female candidate would. Sucks but that's the way it seems to be.
If the Dems win and actually get Biden in place, I'd say Harris will be the first female president in 2023
 
Tubey said:
Clinton lost because she was Clinton, not because she was a woman.
Click to expand...
Clinton lost because she was Clinton and also because she was a she. You can't dismiss prevailing sexism just because HRC had such high personal negatives in some quarters.

(Me culpa: I voted for her and I'd vote for her against any Republican.)
 
sdk said:
Clinton lost because she was Clinton and also because she was a she. You can't dismiss prevailing sexism just because HRC had such high personal negatives in some quarters.

(Me culpa: I voted for her and I'd vote for her against any Republican.)
Click to expand...

It was a factor, but ultimately the sex divide in the USA is 51/49, whilst the non-white population is just 27%, yet Obama won two elections fairly comfortably against white men despite massive racial prejudice in that country.

I don't think Clinton's gender was a deciding factor or even a major factor - I think she was just a completely terrible candidate; almost uniquely so.
 
Tubey said:
Not really. In 2016, slightly more women voted for her than they did for Obama, but black people voted for her much less than then did for Obama. What swung 2016 was Trump playing strong to his base and Clinton not playing strong to hers.

Why Biden is doing so well currently isn't because he's a perfect candidate - instead, it's that Trump has enthused the anti-Trump "base" so hard that Biden could be anyone and he'd get their vote, and Trump has saw his own base erode enough to suggest almost a landslide loss. Everyone who voted for Trump to "see what he could do" have now seen what he does and went back the other way.

If a female had run this time, she'd be in the same place against Trump as Biden is now - or to be honest, she'd be better off. Clinton lost because she was Clinton, not because she was a woman.
Click to expand...

We'll have to disagree in part. Yes, there was and is substantial hatred for Clinton and that alone was enough to defeat her (I'll ignore how much of the hated is related to her being an uppity female.) However, any woman would have had a much harder time than Biden or any other white male in 2016. Frankly a woman still would/does - see the dem primaries - have a harder time.

Nearly 250 years and still not a single female president or VP. Pelosi is the first female speaker. There has never been a female Senate Majority/Minority Leader.
 
Tubey said:
It was a factor, but ultimately the sex divide in the USA is 51/49, whilst the non-white population is just 27%, yet Obama won two elections fairly comfortably against white men despite massive racial prejudice in that country.
Click to expand...
Black men got the vote fifty years before women did in the USA. Sexism is a deeper and older divide.
 
RAFUH said:
We'll have to disagree in part. Yes, there was and is substantial hatred for Clinton and that alone was enough to defeat her (I'll ignore how much of the hated is related to her being an uppity female.) However, any woman would have had a much harder time than Biden or any other white male in 2016. Frankly a woman still would/does - see the dem primaries - have a harder time.

Nearly 250 years and still not a single female president or VP. Pelosi is the first female speaker. There has never been a female Senate Majority/Minority Leader.
Click to expand...

Well, Kamala Harris - a minority female - running as VP should see Biden's ticket absolutely obliterated then, especially seeing as he's depicted on deaths door and Harris is basically President-in-Waiting if they win.

But that hasn't happened, because it's not a negative factor.

I just disagree sorry, completely. I think if Harris was running as the nominee now she'd win by bigger than Biden will.
 
sdk said:
Black men got the vote fifty years before women did in the USA. Sexism is a deeper and older divide.
Click to expand...

So with 49% of the populace women, do they just hate themselves or something?

I'm not saying it's not a factor, but it's overblown. The bigger problem is the lack of a female talent pool to choose from politically - if Hilary Clinton, one of the worst candidates humanly imaginable, is the best female candidate the US can offer at an election, then clearly there's an issue there.

1600890511975.webp

That graph says it all, but as you can see it's clearly improving - Ocasio-Cortez, Harris, both decent. Pelosi has held one of the highest posts in state for years.

I think it's an overblown, easy excuse for Clinton rather than real, tangible factor - regardless of gender or colour, if you put a credible candidate up, they'll do well; Obama proved that, Thatcher - annoyingly - proved that over here too.
 
Tubey said:
So with 49% of the populace women, do they just hate themselves or something?
Click to expand...
When a form of prejudice has been part of the culture forever then yes, many of those in the oppressed group will in fact believe in it too.

v v v v v v v Example v v v v v v v
RAFUH said:
Still A LOT of religious types that believe a woman/wife is subservient to a man/husband and that's just part of the issue.

Edit: Including the next (potentially) member of SCOTUS
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top