Kamala Harris has a problem with men. Will misogyny cost her the election?

A lot of women don't like to talk that way. They like to be a little more equivocal, so they sound less pushy. I think this can have some advantages, for example in group work.

When I was in the military years ago, I found I had to modify my communication style somewhat to give the impression I wanted though - I had to sound more confident about my ideas and the direction I thought we should take, or it was like others didn't even notice I'd said anything.

It wasn't a bad lesson really, to learn to speak to the audience in front of me.

Gosh, cerebral isn't the word I'd have used for Biden.

I think George W was a lot smarter than many people realized - his persona was just that, I think.

But I really do feel lately like the people getting to the top are kind of mediocre. Obama seemed fairly exciting in the US but I even wonder about him now, he pooched his attempts to push Harris so badly.

Yes, its why I think it with be a republican candidate that will be the first female US president.

Just like all three British female prime ministers have been Tory. I can also see the possibility in the future of having Kemi as PM, the first black woman. That could be 4 female PMs over the space of 40 years, all Tory.

Labour hasn’t even had a female as leader of the party, never mind a female PM.

So there has to be something in the perception of femaleness/toughness

Why is it that most strong female leaders tend to come from the Right rather than the Left?

Curiously, on the other hand, a majority of conservative and far-right female leaders of our times – even the more “maternal” figures – often showcase characteristics that are can be either referred to masculine professions or typical of masculine leaderships. Many have a background in the STEM or “hard sciences”: Merkel is a physicist, Thatcher was a chemist, while Von der Leyen used to be a defense minister and Lagarde has long been in charge of financial matters. In the far-right, traditionally masculine traits emerge in aggressive attitudes, loud tone of voices, an overplayed assertiveness, sometimes even in the dress code.

https://www.eui.eu/news-hub?id=women-leaders-are-always-from-the-right

Jacinda Arderne - the ex N.Z Prime minister was a like a big wet lettuce. Maybe there is a tendency for left leaning female candidates to be like this - focused on kindness, inclusiveness, elaborate emoting, lots of descriptive, flowery adjectives?

I do think it is true that female leaders do have to possess what might traditionally be called 'masculine' characteristics if they are to inspire confidence.
Forthright, direct, unwavering, focused on the objectives.

It isn't just because of her sex; it is because of her character and the way she expresses and presents herself. Georgia Meloni, is a far stronger character and is taken seriously on the world stage.

I think if Trump wins then the narrative the US is not ready for a female woc to become president will preside and black female presidents will be simply the object of Netflix drama.

It will mean Trump has beaten two women and the democrats will look maybe for a generation to possibly pick males very likely white for future candidates. As the US system has very tight margins for victory gender will unfortunately be a factor in elections which is really strange when we look on from the UK.

Most of the drama and cultural import we get from the US is progressive and this can be seen from the celeb endorsement of Harris. We don't get to see conservative, for over state voters in TV as this is not the image US media wishes to oresent.

I think this is why we are quite shocked by the amount of vitriol within the US system currently.

The misogyny with the "weak" ;language here is amazing and awful. She was a prosecutor. She's not weak.

Since Trump is Putin's boyfriend, exactly how useful do you think he would be in that scenario? TBF, he might be useful, but at best only to Putin.

I suspect you are assuming Harris would be useless merely because of her sex.

Kamala Harris would be useless in a crisis. If Putin starts sabre rattling I dread to think how useless she would be.

I think there is doubt in general about whether politics selects the "best" people. Eg Biden, Trump, George W Bush all happened to be white men, but I don't think they were the most capable white men for the job, let alone the best Americans full stop. I always thought Biden came across very well outside the US but there are still Americans who found him to cerebral.
You could even question whether seeming to come across as a "leader" or having charisma is the most important characteristic but of course that's one of the things people will judge on.

I have a cousin, who is a bright guy, who is convinced that there was basically some sort of nefarious plan to get Harris in without having her go through the normal selection process. His reasoning is that there it's so clear she'd never have been selected otherwise.

I don't really think that's the case, but I can kind of see his point.

Thatcher is an interesting comparison. Some people forget that at the time, many people felt she wasn't a conservative at all - she represented something quite new, and so many Tories opposed her as well as the center and left.

But the force of per personality was huge.

I find myself wondering if that was always rare, or if it's become more rare. Boris maybe had some of that, but he lacked self-disapline which I think is what did him in. Sunak didn't seem that way to me, nor does Starmer.

She just isn’t a leader.

Ive been watching interviews of Margaret Thatcher online recently.

Now you really couldn’t get anyone more divisive than MT. I don’t even imagine that America will still talk about Trump in 50 years in the way Thatcher is in the UK. There are still huge sections of society that would never ever consider voting Tory because of the Thatcher years.

But no one could argue she wasnt a leader. She is somewhat mesmerising when she speaks, unflustered, calm, direct, answers the question, polite, steely, intelligent, sharp, focused. I mean she was hated but she had leadership qualities.

Now contrast this with Harris in interviews , the complete opposite. She’s very anxious, circular answers , scripted, boring, bland. Now she seems like a decent person but she’s completely uninspiring and couldn’t possibly leader of the world’s largest economy. How she even got VP is beyond me.

Liz Truss was a dreadful PM and an awful human being. There's no need to stick up for bad leaders just because they're women. I am totally unimpressed by Kamala. She just seems like a vacuous corporate suit.

Trump is a horrible, stupid narcissist and I would rather cut off my own leg then vote for him but I would struggle to cast a ballot for the Harris either.
This is the key point @User37482

Trump doesn't need to increase his vote people just need to not be motivated to vote for cardboard Kamala and he'll win.

I think the American people and the world wanted a strong alternative to Trump and if they'd have been offered one they'd have voted them.

It's become quickly obvious however that Kamala Harris isn't that so her momentum is fading fast. It's not that loads of people suddenly like trump it's that she's not going to get the vote out.

She's weak. And I think weakness in a women is more intolerable to men who have a bias about whether a women can be strong enough to lead anyway. Is that misogyny? Debatable

But the truth is Harris is weak, unlikable and a women.

She's revealed herself to be the most awful example of exactly what everyone has come to hate: empty, coached, word salad platitudes politics which we're meant to accept as some sort of filler for reality and not notice there is nothing there.

People are noticing. People have had enough of this type of politics. And she's terrible at it.

The Dems are campaigning like it's 1999 with a candidate who's terrible. Even Michele Obama is tacitly admitting she's terrible, but saying you have to vote for her anyway.
Not sure that's going to work.

If she loses the post mortem will claim misogyny and racism but there's so many other reasons she won't get out the vote. An analysis just based on identity politics will just be continuing the exact same mistake which lead them here.

Of course it is the business of voters how their leading politicians conduct themselves - it is a demonstration of their view of the world, of where they hold their morals, a reflection of how they are likely to conduct their business behind the scenes.

You might think using sex to gain advantage, or leaving a trail of unsupported children in your wake it ok, but other voters may prefer a politician who succeeded through intellectual acumen and who holds fathers responsible for financially supporting their offspring.

Honestly even if Kamala Harris had slept with EVERYONE I would consider this none of my business as long as everyone was consenting. Same with Boris, I think he’s a disaster for any woman who comes within 5 meters of him but who he shags is none of my concern. Leaders are rarely perfect. I just care they can do the job.

Trump is a predator, it’s come up time and again including a civil lawsuit for rape. Disgusting man.

I also think some are making the calculation that Vance will actually be the one in charge. He used to be not crazy and quite thoughtful. So lets hope for an inkling of sanity from him if he makes it to the white house (which he probably will).

I think it has more to do with the fact that men are leaning right and women are leaning left and that’s amplified in younger cohorts. I’m inclined to think this has more to do with politics than her sex tbh (not saying there aren’t people who wouldn’t vote for her because she’s a woman). I also think the dems progressive politics is harming them.

I don’t think it’s dissimilar to the west generally, you have a left wing class who’s moved away from the working classes towards identity politics, niche concerns, luxury beliefs stuff and now you have college campuses overrun with as one black student put it “white people cos playing oppression” (thats the impression they give themselves and what people see on the news). So even if the right looks like a mess I imagine for some they think “well it can’t get much worse, theres a boy in my daughters locker room and no-one seems to think this is a problem, I don’t care about the middle east and my wages are stagnant.”

Trump is a horrible, stupid narcissist and I would rather cut off my own leg then vote for him but I would struggle to cast a ballot for the Harris either.

even if we accept that this happened....

....we're judging someone allegedly "sleeping their way" to the top harsher than someone who is a convicted felon, sexual predator (as found by a court) and has paid for the abortions he and his career benefited from that he is now vowing to ban for anyone else regardless of women's health?

one of these is not like the other....

The point is that it didn't happen in this case. It's a lie.

It does happen though.

There is a propensity on MN to make out that woman are always the victims in these things. It is simply not the case usually. They are getting the status/power/money that they desire.

That’s a poster who has already had a post deleted on another thread this morning. I wouldn’t bother @GillBeck

Why should people vote for their own interests?