100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 28, 2020 - Image 9

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Wednesday, October 28, 2020 — 9
statement

I

n 2016, just four years shy of the hun-

dred-year anniversary of the ratifica-

tion of the 19th amendment, Ameri-

cans witnessed history as the first woman ever

was nominated as a presidential candidate by

a major political party.

America also saw her lose, and for many,

it was all hell breaking loose. Never mind the

apparent misogynist who was her opponent,

many Americans were heartbroken and hope-

less seeing a woman rise so high, reaching a

place where no woman had been allowed to

ascend before, only to be rebuffed so brazenly

and with such hostility. On top of the heart-

break of coming so close to making history

and breaking one of the last intact glass ceil-

ings, many were fearful of what the next four

years would look like — and rightfully so.

On election night 2016, I tried my best to

stay awake, even as moods darkened when

supposedly blue-leaning swing states swung

red. Even then, as I drifted off to sleep, there

was absolutely no doubt in my mind that I

was finally going to see a woman elected as

the president of the United States, and thank-

fully, one who was guided by feminist prin-

ciples and advocated for progressive policies.

When I woke up the next morning, my heart

sank into my stomach and my throat felt like

it was closing; like so many women and oth-

er marginalized people, I knew exactly how

high the stakes really were.

It was devastating, soul-crushing and

deeply distressing.

Now, nearly four years later, there is once

again a woman making history at the top of

the ballot. On Aug. 11, former vice president

Joe Biden selected Sen. Kamala Harris, D-

Calif., as his running mate. Introducing her

at their first press conference together as his

ticket’s vice president, Biden said, “One of the

reasons that I chose Kamala is that we both

believe that we can define America simply in

one word: possibilities.”

Even before any vote is cast, Harris’s nomi-

nation is historic: She is the both the first

Black woman and the first Indian woman to

be nominated for vice president by a major

political party. If Biden is elected president,

she will be the first woman to serve in one of

the highest roles in our nation as the first fe-

male vice president.

Nodding toward this legacy, Biden also

said, “This morning, all across the nation,

little girls woke up, especially little Black and

brown girls, who so often feel overlooked and

undervalued in their communities. But today

just maybe they’re seeing themselves for the

first time in a new way: as the stuff of presi-

dents and vice presidents.”

In an effort to understand the impact of

Harris’s nomination, I spoke to several Uni-

versity of Michigan students about their

thoughts on Biden choosing Harris to be his

running mate and what her vice presidency

might mean.

In an email to The Michigan Daily, Jake

Riegel, an LSA sophomore studying American

Culture and a member of Students for Biden

on campus, wrote about what Biden’s selec-

tion shows.

“... The Democratic Party is proving itself

to be the party of diversity and inclusion,” Rie-

gel wrote. “I do feel more excited (to vote for

Joe Biden), because Senator Harris was my

preferred vice presidential candidate.”

Riegel also commented on the historic na-

ture of her candidacy.

“It is significant that Joe Biden picked Ka-

mala Harris, both because she is Black and

South Asian, as well as a woman, but I am

more excited because of her qualifications.

She is ultimately qualified for both the posi-

tion as vice president and president.”

While many are excited about the progress

Harris’s nomination means for women in poli-

tics, others are a bit more cautious. LSA fresh-

man Eva Hale, also a member of Students for

Biden, touched on this idea in an interview.

“A woman still hasn’t been elected (as pres-

ident), and if Joe and Kamala win, she still

wouldn’t have been elected,” Hale said. “The

fact that a lot of women were competitive for

the presidential nomination this year is great

— I guess it shows we’re getting there, but we

can’t say we’re there yet.”

While Harris’s nomination makes her a

trailblazer for women’s political representa-

tion, she is not, however, the first woman to

be nominated as a vice presidential running

mate. In fact, there have been two women be-

fore her who were selected to be on a major

party ticket. The stories of these two women’s

nominations could not be more different, but

the country’s reaction to them provides im-

portant context for Harris’s nomination and

potential election.

In 1984, then-Congresswoman Geraldine

Ferraro, a Democrat from New York, was se-

lected by Walter Mondale to be his running

mate. Before this selection, Ferraro, a former

schoolteacher and sex crimes prosecutor,

quickly rose in the Democratic party’s lead-

ership, becoming the Secretary of the House

Democratic Caucus.

It was not long before she faced misog-

yny on the campaign trail. On top of sex-

ist coverage about her clothes and her hair,

she was asked by a voter if she could bake a

blueberry muffin because “down here in Mis-

sissippi the men don’t cook.” On Meet the

Press, one moderator questioned whether she

could push the nuclear button and if Mondale

would have chosen her if she weren’t a wom-

an. Articles were written asking if America

was “ready” for a female vice president, some-

thing pundits continue to ask to this day, just

as they asked if America was ready for a Black

president when then-Senator Obama ran in

2008.

The sexism didn’t only come from the

press; it also came from her opponent’s cam-

paign: Vice President Bush’s spokesperson,

Peter Teeley, said, “She’s too bitchy. She’s

very arrogant. Humility isn’t one of her strong

points, and I think that comes through.”

Ambitious women frequently receive these

sorts of remarks from men like Teeley — men

who view women who dare to step out of their

socially-constructed place with contempt and

vitriol.

Indicative of the tightrope she was forced

to walk as a woman vying for one of the high-

est offices in the land, Ferrero often referred

to herself as “a housewife from Queens.” She

could not be too openly ambitious. She need-

ed to be careful not to be perceived as threat-

ening the status quo of men holding almost

all political power. She could not even defend

herself against sexist attacks; in 2008, she re-

flected on the experience saying, “In 1984, I

couldn’t say, ‘Stop it,” because I couldn’t look

like I was whining or upset about it.”

On top of the criticism she faced solely as

a result of being a woman, Ferraro’s nomina-

tion, while historic, was essentially doomed

from the beginning. Trailing Reagan, Mondale

decided he needed to shake up the race by

picking a female running mate, an effort to

clinch the excitement of Democratic voters.

The effort failed, though, in part due to Mon-

dale’s own strategic blunders, resulting in the

Mondale-Ferraro ticket only winning 13 elec-

toral votes in the Electoral College.

While Mondale’s own candidacy was ill-

fated from the beginning due to the country

experiencing short-term economic growth

from the Reagan-era tax cuts, picking a wom-

an to be your running mate as a last-ditch ef-

fort to save your candidacy is nothing to be

applauded. It is objectifying and indicates a

level of contempt for women voters by think-

ing that they will rush to your side for picking

a lady to be on the ticket.

And yet, 24 years later, another woman was

selected as a vice presidential running mate

for the same reason: Sarah Palin.

In 2008, then-Senator and candidate John

McCain selected Palin to be his running mate,

though his first-choice pick was Joe Lieber-

man, a centrist from Connecticut. He ulti-

mately picked then-Governor of Alaska Sarah

Palin because, as one GOP strategist said, he

“clearly felt like (the campaign) needed to

shake this race up and go for broke.” Picking a

woman to be his running mate as a Republican

nominee certainly raised eyebrows, but also

initially elicited positive feedback, with Mc-

Cain’s campaign receiving a bit of a boost in

the aftermath of this selection.

Again, though, Palin was set up to fail. At

the time of the pick, McCain was consistently

trailing behind Obama in polling, dragged

down for his party association with Bush as

the economy barreled toward collapse in the

fall of 2008. McCain needed a splashy pick to

try to bring some enthusiasm and new inter-

est to his campaign.

On top of tasking her with saving his de-

clining candidacy, McCain thrust Palin into

the spotlight with relatively little vetting and

preparedness. Of course, as a governor, there

was little excuse as to why Palin could not

name a single newspaper or magazine she

regularly read in a now-famous interview

with Katie Couric, where she said she read

“all of them, any of them.”

Still, the McCain campaign famous-

ly failed to fully vet Palin as they had scram-

bled to find a pick after several other candi-

dates fell through, using her as less of an equal

partner or colleague and more as a shiny new

toy to dazzle voters and the press.

Despite the time between Ferraro’s histo-

ry-making nomination and Palin joining Mc-

Cain’s ticket, female candidates were still sub-

ject to similar instances of sexism by the media

and voters on the campaign trail. In reflection

on the 2008 campaign, which also included

Hillary Clinton’s first presidential run, Fer-

raro said, “Even when (the media was) so sex-

ist to Hillary, and we said something about it,

they still thought we were whining or acting

like sore losers ... But I never thought we’d

have the opportunity to see another woman

go through it, this same election cycle, after

the press had been put on notice,” referencing

when Charlie Gibson of ABC News asked Pal-

in how somebody could manage a family of

seven and the vice presidency.

It is true that one’s political party rarely

protects female candidates from sexist cov-

erage or attacks, but a female candidate’s

political party, particularly due to the policy

preferences she holds, are decisive in de-

termining whether her election is a victory

for women and for feminism. Though some

who are not particularly well-read on femi-

nist scholarship will claim the election of a

woman — any woman — automatically means

progress for women’s rights, this assertion is

deeply misguided and factually wrong. The

election of Sarah Palin, an anti-choice, far-

right Republican, would not have been a win

for women. As vice president, she would

have advocated for positions in the McCain

administration that would have systemati-

cally stripped women, as well as other mar-

ginalized groups, of their rights and liberties,

particularly on issues of reproductive justice,

voting rights, environmental justice and eco-

nomic justice.

Women’s political interests are only ben-

efitted when women who will work toward

gender equality and autonomy are elected.

statement

On Kamala Harris:
A moment of
redress for women

BY MARISA WRIGHT,

STATEMENT DEPUTY EDITOR

ILLUSTRATION BY MAGGIE WIEBE

Read more at
MichiganDaily.com

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan