In the immediate aftermath of Elizabeth Warren’s announcement that she had dropped out of the 2020 race, claims of sexism roared across headlines and social media timelines.
An article for The Nation had a headline which read: Sexism Sank Elizabeth Warren.
Another, from Slate: “I Waited Four Years for This?” The anguish of Clinton-Warren supporters.
And yet another, from Vanity Fair: Hillary Clinton: “Incredible” Elizabeth Warren Lost Because She’s a Woman.
Fellow 2020 dropout and senator, Kamala Harris, spoke out against the perceived sexism, saying: “This election cycle in particular has … presented very legitimate questions about the challenges of women running for president of the United States.”
Unfortunately for those who like to bank on sexism as the reason for their favorite candidates falling flat, the research has shown that gender has no bearing on a candidate’s success.
As The New York Times reported on a study in June 2019: “The research found that in large part, women and people of color in 2018 were as likely to win their elections as white men, once they were on the ballot.”
The director of the organization which conducted the study noted: “‘White men’s elect-ability advantage is a myth. When reflective candidates are on the ballot, they win as often as white men.’”
While women are still underrepresented in government, it’s not because they’re losing at the hands of sexism. The issue, rather, is recruiting women to actually run.
But that wasn’t Elizabeth Warren’s issue. She ran. And she lost.
But maybe, just maybe, it wasn’t because she’s a woman.
Warren ran a campaign which catered to the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Her ideas included, but are not limited to:
Support the Green New Deal
Eliminate $640 billion in college debt and make college “free”
Medicare for All