They say that victory has a thousand fathers but defeat is an orphan, but a liberal defeat seems to have a thousand abusive step-dads as a thousand theories are trotted out to explain the loss.
All of them having to do with how much America sucks.
The New York Times has decided to ‘circle back’ and amplify the claim that Kamala lost because of sexism.
“Will the U.S. Ever Be Ready for a Female President?” the paper asks, as if Kamala’s loss were somehow evidence that it’s not. Rather than that it’s not ready to elect a trainwreck word salad coup.
The article starts by suggesting, without a shred of evidence, that conservatives hate women the most and would only vote for a conservative woman, courtesy of Bill Clinton.
A few days earlier and several hundred miles north, Mr. Clinton — whose wife tried and failed twice to win the White House — made a similar argument.
“Ideologically, the people who are most likely to be against women are most likely to be conservative, so when people agree with you, it’s easier to be for them,” he said in an appearance at the DealBook Summit hosted by The New York Times. “But I think a woman can be elected president. I do.”
This doesn’t even make any sense.
Then there’s doubling down on the lie that Kamala was a great candidate.
“People feel pretty stung by what happened,” said Liz Shuler, the first woman elected to lead the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the largest federation of unions in the country, who supported Ms. Harris and believes she made no significant missteps in the race. “She totally over-performed and yet fell short. So it does feel like that sucker punch of, like, ‘Wow, even when you do everything right, that glass ceiling is still elusive.’”
Everything right? Name just one thing Kamala did right. Just one.
While few will say so aloud, some Democrats are already quietly hoping their party doesn’t nominate a woman in 2028, fearing she could not overcome an enduring hold of sexism on the American electorate.
They could nominate a woman, a man or a sheep, but that nominee needs to be able to convince Americans that either
- They can do the job
- The alternative is so much worse
Kamala couldn’t manage to do either one. The issue isn’t women. It was the price of food. But Dems will go on insisting that Americans just hate women.
Which means that women hate women.
Ms. Harris won the lowest level of support from female voters of any Democratic nominee since 2004, according to an analysis by the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.
There you go. Women are sexist.