What Woman May be Next?

October 6th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

After Hillary Clinton lost the battle for the nomination of the Democratic Party for president, many hoped that she would become Barack Obama’s running mate. After all, those who supported Clinton said, she received the votes of 18 million Democrats; an incredibly large amount of votes for anyone, let alone a loser.

Furthermore, many of her supporters said, she may very well be the most competent female politician in Washington and outside it. If women wanted to break through the glass ceiling of the White House, Clinton was their gal.

But Obama did not ask his main rival to become his running mate. Instead, he asked Senator Joe Biden – a WASP if ever there was one. By doing so, Obama destroyed all chances of a woman breaking through the glass ceiling this year.

Or so it seemed.

Suddenly John McCain surprised the political world by picking Sarah Palin as his running mate. Palin, the governor of Alaska, was mostly unknown in the rest of the country, let alone in the rest of the world. At the moment she joined the Republican ticket, however, Republican fundraising tripled. She instantly appealed to white women, who recognized themselves in Palin and who, it seemed, were excited about a mother of five possibly destroying the glass ceiling.

But then the tide turned. The MSM and the Obama campaign launched a major offensive against Palin decrying her as radically social conservative, having questionable religious beliefs, being less than a real woman, unintelligent, and not informed enough to be vice president. They even used sexism against Palin and, said to say, it worked. Palin lost support, and the Republican ticket plunged in the polls.

The two are now some 6% behind in nationwide polls, and state polls are increasingly in Obama and Biden’s favor as well. It seems that it will be difficult if not virtually impossible for the Republican ticket to stage a comeback and, by doing so, destroy the glass ceiling for all women in America.

Which leads us to the question: who’s next? What woman could possibly enter the White House, either as president or vice president? Is there any female politician competent enough to break the glass ceiling? Is there any female politician willing to try it, after having seen how sexism was employed frequently against both Clinton and Palin?

My guess is that, from the perspective of women’s emancipation, 2008 will come to be known as a terrible year, a black page in the history of women’s emancipation in the United States, and perhaps even worldwide. It will undoubtedly take perhaps as long as eight years, perhaps more, for another capable woman may try to beat the odds, and enter the White House in an official position.

From the perspective of women’s emancipation, it’s a sad prediction but, I think, more than likely.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. J
    October 7th, 2008 at 09:03
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Here’s how I see it:

    The information that surfaced about Sarah Palin wasn’t the result of a major offensive by the Obama campaign. In fact, the Obama campaign was careful in talking about her at all: they chose instead to focus their statements on the economy, or on John McCain’s policies (with the usual twist of tying him to Bush).

    The fact that Sarah Palin didn’t carry the country’s female vote based on her gender alone is, I think, a major victory that cannot be overlooked. What better way to show that women care about more than their gender? If they are willing to vote against a team with a female on it – and many have indicated they will – then they don’t need anyone to shatter the glass ceiling. They finished the job themselves.

    Or they will, if events turn out a certain way.

  2. Interested
    October 7th, 2008 at 10:35
    Reply | Quote | #2

    I think, a major victory that cannot be overlooked. What better way to show that women care about more than their gender? If they are willing to vote against a team with a female on it -

    For that thought to carry any water at all, you’d have to demonstrate no significant part of HRC’s votes came because she has a set of ovaries.  And that you’d be hard pressed to do.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.