#glass ceiling

[thedimhour]

Three Arts Cafe

photos are my own, reblogs are fine, do not repost/reuse

[ginger-by-the-sea]

[departmentofinteriors]

[dynamicity-keysmash]

The Democratic party needs to stop using female candidates for human sacrifice.

That may be hyperbolic, but it is true that both female candidates for president were put forth in years with strong headwinds and rough political environments for the democratic party.

Hillary Clinton ran after two consecutive Democratic terms that left voters feeling uneasy about the nation's economic recovery. I don't think it's widely understood how difficult it is to win a third consecutive term for a political party. I think that if a more mainstream Tea Party Republican had been nominated instead of Trump, as was expected, Republicans would've even had a shot at the popular vote. After all, Republicans did win the congressional House popular vote in 2016. When factoring in a strong electoral college bias on top of the general national mood, it was never going to be an easy year for Democrats.

I do acknowledge that if Clinton had run a scrappier campaign with a central narrative more focused on working-class perspectives, she could've won. She was certainly a very flawed candidate, but my point is that 2016 was not a fundamentally easy political environment for Democrats in the first place.

Harris, on the other hand, was quite plainly fed into a wood chipper. It's finally a woman's turn again, just in time for her to enjoy a political environment in which 75% of the country thinks we're on the wrong track, the party's incumbent president has horrible approval ratings, and she has 3 months to catch up to an opposing presidential campaign that has effectively been weaving its narrative for 9 years. 2024 was an awful political environment for Democrats.

Given that the Democratic party has never nominated a female candidate in an election with a favorable political environment, It is an absolute tragedy that many are coming to the conclusion that Democrats categorically shouldn't run a woman in 2028, which is likely to be a highly viable election for the party. A woman definitely could've won in 2008. A woman likely could've won in 2020 as well. We cannot allow the Democratic party to continue to save fundamentally advantageous elections for male candidates and only give women a shot when the party's standing is shaky at best.

[soberscientistlife]

[originalleftist]

Harris selecting Governor Walz as her running mate also opens the way for Minnesota's Lt. Governor, Peggy Flanagan, to become the first Native American and first woman governor of Minnesota, and first woman Native American governor in American history!

Bobby Joe Champion, the President of the Minnesota state senate, would then be Lt. Governor, and the first Black Lt. Governor of Minnesota.

Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan could make history with Tim Walz

Gov. Tim Walz is still high on lists of Harris running mate contenders, so here’s what it would mean for state government.

[itellmyselfsecrets]

Some call women's segregation into low-paid work a choice. But it's a funny kind of choice when there is no realistic option other than the children not being cared for and the housework not getting done. In any case, fifty year's worth of US census data has proven that when women join an industry in high numbers, that industry attracts lower pay and loses 'prestige’, suggesting that low-paid work chooses women rather than the other way around. This choice-that-isn't-a-choice is making women poor…Women earn between 31% and 75% less than men over their lifetimes.

This all leaves women facing extreme poverty in their old age, in part because they simply can't afford to save for it. - Caroline Criado Perez (Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men)

[reality-detective]

Hillary talking about the firmament 🤔