WaPo (“Michelle Obama says America is ‘not ready’ for a female president“):
Former first lady Michelle Obama thinks that the United States is “not ready” for a female president and has “a lot of growing up to do” to reach that point.
“Don’t even look at me about running because you all are lying. You’re not ready for a woman. You are not. So don’t waste my time,” said Obama, who is an often-discussed potential presidential candidate, though she’s previously said she doesn’t want to run.
On her side of the argument is the fact that Democrats nominated a woman in 2016 and again in 2024 and lost both elections to Donald J. Trump, the least popular major party nominee of all time. Further, they ran a man in the intervening election, also against Trump, and won. QED.
But, of course, Hillary Clinton received almost 3 million more votes than Trump in 2016, a two percent margin. Trump won because of the weirdness of our electoral system, which overweights low-population states in 51* winner-take-all contests.
Kamala Harris’ loss last year was, well, overdetermined. Her 11th-hour replacement of Joe Biden on the ticket was highly controversial. The economy was in bad shape. There was a global anti-incumbent sentiment.
Regardless, Obama blames men for the results:
“There’s still, sadly, a lot of men who do not feel like they can be led by a woman. And we saw it,” Obama said.
[…]
Obama stumped for Vice President Kamala Harris in last year’s presidential race, and called for men to consider the effects a Trump victory would have on reproductive health care and rights.
“Fellas,” Obama said at one event on the campaign trail, “before you cast your votes, ask yourselves, what side of history do you want to be on?”
This claim is very hard to test.
A recent American University poll found that 82% “Would be open to voting for a qualified woman as president.” [slide 26] That 18% percent admit they would not is problematic, for sure. But men and woman over 50 were equally open to the possibility, with 87% in the affirmative. Men under 50 were only 80% affirmative—but women under 50 were only 75% positive.
Comparing the demographic breakdown of the three contests is highly problematic. We can only make an educated guess, using notoriously unrepresentative exit polls. And the sex of the candidates is surely not the only factor determining turnout. Still, Pew has produced rather detailed breakdowns of all three contests. [2016, 2020, 2024] Here’s what they found:
| TRUMP | CLINTON | TRUMP | BIDEN | TRUMP | HARRIS | |
| MEN | 52 | 41 | 50 | 48 | 55 | 43 |
| WOMEN | 39 | 54 | 44 | 55 | 46 | 53 |
Indeed, a considerably higher percentage of men voted for Biden than for the two female candidates, whereas the percentage of women voting for the Democrat remained remarkably stable. Then again, the percentage of women voting for Trump has gone up every cycle.
Further, I’ve increasingly seen 2020 as an outlier. The COVID crisis wildly impacted the contest, both in terms of voter attitudes and in the way it was conducted. Trump almost certainly depressed his own turnout with his bizarre campaign against mail-in and other early voting. So, while it’s possible that men preferred Biden over Clinton and Harris primarily because of his sex, it’s likely that we’re simply seeing a very different male sample.
Additionally, while the women’s vote for the Democratic candidate was almost exactly the same throughout the three contests, it’s worth noting that Harris would have won if women voted for Trump at 2016 levels.
*Maine and Nebraska, with 3 and 5 electoral votes, respectively, award two electors to the statewide winner and one elector per House district. The impact on the races in question was nonexistent.
