Cal Thomas: Not ready for a female president?
In a recent series of interviews promoting her new book, former First Lady Michelle Obama expressed her belief that America is not yet ready for a female president, citing the electoral defeats of prominent women like Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton as evidence of lingering sexism in the political landscape. Obama draws parallels to historical claims that the nation was unprepared for a Catholic or Black president, suggesting that societal biases continue to impede women’s political advancement. However, critics argue that these losses are more reflective of individual candidates’ abilities to connect with voters rather than a blanket rejection of female leadership. For instance, while Harris faced criticism for her perceived inability to articulate her beliefs clearly, Clinton’s struggle with public perception as “unlikeable” played a significant role in her electoral defeat.
Despite her critical stance, Michelle Obama’s impressive background—growing up in a stable, middle-class family, excelling academically, and serving in various public roles—highlights the opportunities America has afforded her. This raises questions about her perspective on the nation; her previous comments about feeling pride in America during her husband’s presidency indicate a complex relationship with the country’s progress. Critics suggest that her focus on identity politics, rather than policy substance, detracts from the broader conversation about women’s capabilities in leadership. The current political climate, with an increasing number of women holding office, presents a mixed picture of progress. However, the emphasis on identity rather than qualifications in some political circles has led to concerns about the effectiveness and direction of leadership.
The discourse around female leadership is further complicated by examples from other countries, such as Japan’s recent election of its first female prime minister, who has garnered public support, and the controversial legacy of Bangladesh’s former female prime minister, Sheikh Hasina. These instances illustrate that gender alone does not determine effective leadership. In the U.S., the political dynamics can shift dramatically based on candidates’ policies and qualifications, as seen in recent elections where identity did not guarantee support among voters. Ultimately, the conversation about women in leadership roles must transcend identity politics, focusing instead on the candidates’ abilities to lead and connect with the electorate. As the political landscape continues to evolve, the challenge remains to foster an environment where women can succeed based on their merits and visions for the future, rather than being defined solely by their gender or race.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHAQUhmWag0
Former f
irst lady Michelle Obama
says America is
not ready
for a female president. In a series of recent interviews promoting her new book, Michelle Obama points to the losses of Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton as evidence of what she regards as sexism.
Recall that similar things were once said about John F. Kennedy, that America was not ready for a Catholic president. More recently some said America wasn’t ready for a Black president. And yet in
2008
, 43 percent of white voters voted for Barack Obama. In
2012
, it was 39 percent.
Michelle Obama’s comments continue the focus on identity politics, rather than the substance of one’s ideas and policies. What difference does it make (to quote Hillary Clinton in a different context) about one’s race or gender? Harris lost not because she is a woman, but because some thought she could not articulate what she believed in a language they could understand. Clinton lost because some found her “
unlikeable
.”
Michelle Obama is from a middle-class
background
anyone might find admirable, even enviable. She grew up in a two-parent home. A Google search notes that “After excelling in public schools, she earned a sociology and African-American studies degree from Princeton University and a law degree from Harvard Law School. She then became a lawyer in Chicago, where she met her future husband, Barack Obama, before dedicating her career to public service in roles at Chicago City Hall and the University of Chicago.”
One might think with such a resume she would be praising a nation that gave her the opportunity to rise to such a high level. Instead, recall her
comment
after her husband was elected president: “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction.”
How sad is that – for her, not for her country? She seems to have chips on both shoulders. She is always criticizing someone or something, but to what end?
Women hold more political offices in America than ever before. Some are strong and competent conservatives. Others are drowning in the sewer of identity politics. A
Wall Street Journal
editorial quotes Seattle mayor-elect Katie Wilson: “I will appoint a cabinet of exceptional leaders whose lived experiences reflect the diversity of Seattle’s Black, Indigenous, Asian and Pacific Islander, Latinx/Hispanic, and People of Color communities as well as that of women, immigrants and refugees, 2SLGBTQIA+ communities, people with disabilities, people of all faith traditions, and residents from every socio-economic background.”
Notice the absence of any reference to capabilities or policies. This is the dead end of identity politics.
Japan recently elected the country’s first female prime minister, who seems popular and competent. Being female, though, does not mean women are necessarily better at leading nations than men. The female former prime minister of Bangladesh,
Sheikh Hasina
, has been sentenced to death in absentia (she fled to India after her ouster) by a special court for her role in the killing of
1,400
protesters who participated in nationwide demonstrations last year.
This isn’t really about gender and race. When a Black or female Republican is running for office against a woman who is white, female and a Democrat (I give you the recent election for governor in
Virginia
), liberal, Black and female Democrats mostly vote for the white women.
A
New York Post
letter writer said this about Harris: “We are not ready to vote for a candidate who did not win one presidential primary. We are not ready to vote for an individual who was selected for the vice presidency based on identity, not qualifications. We are not ready to vote for a candidate appointed by former President Joe Biden.”
A female presidential candidate with the policies of the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher would likely get support from most conservative Republicans. I would be among them.
Readers may email Cal Thomas at
tcaeditors@tribpub.com
. Look for Cal Thomas’ latest book “A Watchman in the Night: What I’ve Seen Over 50 Years Reporting on America” (HumanixBooks).
