Saturday, June 09, 2018

Mars Needs More Women-- But Not As Much As Congress Does


Two nights ago I went to a meet-and-greet for Rashida Tlaib, an extraordinary former Michigan legislator who is running for the open seat in Detroit formerly held by John Conyers. The event was hosted by Democratic activist Jyoti Sarda. Like Rashida, Jyoti emphasized in her introduction of the candidate, that this was a time not just to elect more Democrats, but to elect "the right" Democrats. That got my attention. Her goal, though, was a little more "identity politics," more women, more minorities, rather than more progressives, or even more men progressives or minority progressives. The part of her speech that I agreed with most wholeheartedly, though, was when she said we need people in Congress whose life experience better reflects that of the country.

Fewer rich white male corporate lawyers would be good way to start, although I have my reservations when it comes to the DCCC recruiting rich white female corporate lawyers instead, as they've been doing. New polling from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal shows that 87% of Democrats and 67% of all registered voters say that the country would be better off if more women were elected to political office, while just a quarter of voters (24%) disagree. Only 10% of Democrats disagree. As you might guess, just 49% of Republicans say that the country would be better off with more women in office, while 38% say they disagree with that statement.
About the same share of men overall (66 percent) and women overall (69 percent) agree that the country would be better off with more female elected officials.

But both Republican men (49 percent) and Republican women (48 percent) agree with that statement at far lower rates than Democratic men (88 percent) and Democratic women (87 percent.)

... So far this cycle, a total of 431 women-- including 320 Democrats-- have filed to run for the House, smashing the previous record of 298 female candidates in 2012, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. And with months left to go in primary season, at least 116 wome-- 94 of them Democrats-- are already set to be their party’s House nominee.

One of the only biographical details more desirable for both Republicans and Democrats? Military service. About seven-in-10 voters overall (71 percent) describe those who are veterans as particularly attractive political candidates.

The enthusiasm for female and veteran candidates has also been underscored this midterm cycle by significant primary victories for women with military backgrounds, particularly among Democrats. Former U.S. Air Force captain Chrissy Houlahan (Pa.-6), Marine fighter pilot Amy McGrath (KY-06) and Navy veteran Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11) are all considered among to be among the Democratic Party’s strongest congressional candidates, and each will each compete in must-watch races in the fall. On the GOP side, Republicans in Washington hope that onetime combat fighter pilot Martha McSally will emerge from her August primary as the strongest candidate to retain Jeff Flake’s Arizona Senate seat.
What about Debbie Wasserman Schultz? The Democratic Party promoted Kyrsten Sinema, the Democrat with the most reactionary voting record in the House (and head of the Blue Dog caucus), to run for the U.S. Senate. And they promoted an almost as bad freshman congresswoman, Jacky Rosen to run for the Nevada Senate seat. They're both really horrible, regardless of gender. ProgressivePunch rate 65 congressional Democrats "F." 18 are women. This is the list-- from bad to worse:
Val Demings (New Dem-FL)
Colleen Hanabusa (New Dem-HI)
Norma Torres (New Dem-CA)
Marcy Kaptur (OH)
Dina Titus (NV)
Tulsi Gabbard (HI)
Lisa Blunt Rochester (New Dem-DE)
Elizabeth Esty (New Dem-CT)
Suzan DelBene (New Dem-WA)
Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM)
Annie Kuster (New Dem-NH)
Terri Sewell (New Dem-AL)
Julia Brownley (New Dem-CA)
Kathleen Rice (New Dem-NY)
Jacky Rosen (NV)
Cheri Bustos (Blue Dog-IL)
Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL)
Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ)
Coming up in November are really great candidates like Katie Porter (CA), Kara Eastman (NE), Jess King (PA), Lisa Brown (WA) and, hopefully, Alexandria Ocasio (NY) and Michiganders Ellen Lipton and Rashida Tlaib. But watch out for really bad House candidates like, for example, Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Susie Lee (NV), Kathy Manning (NC), Lauren Baer (FL) and Michiganders Gretchen Driskell and Elisa Slotkin.

Labels: , ,


At 5:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its never really about gender - it never was and it never will be. It is about good people who have good intentions and a good heart that's in the right place - and there is no assurance that women have any of these qualities more than men do. If the person in question, who has these qualities, is also a woman, then that's great. However, let's not get into this whole feminism thing.....

At 6:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It won't matter unless the democraps are utterly repudiated as a party. Pelosi is a skirt. so is DWS and $hillbillary and DiFi. As long as the party remains corrupt, the nameplate on and the configuration of the ass sitting in the leadershit seat won't matter. Money will rule and people will be ratfucked either way.

More women couldn't be worse. But it won't be any better until congress has a different "left" party in place.


Post a Comment

<< Home