Still find the debate between Warren and Sanders camps very confusing.
The best evidence in political science seems to suggest that women do *not* face an electoral penalty.
But isn't the idea that America is so sexist that women do face such a penalty the more "woke" position?
The best evidence in political science seems to suggest that women do *not* face an electoral penalty.
But isn't the idea that America is so sexist that women do face such a penalty the more "woke" position?
This seems to be one of those strange but increasingly frequent circumstances in which the same people can attack you both for holding and for not holding an idea.
"Women do face an electoral penalty." Sexist!
"Women don't face an electoral penalty." You're blind to sexism!
"Women do face an electoral penalty." Sexist!
"Women don't face an electoral penalty." You're blind to sexism!
To be fair, it matters who says these positions why.
There's a difference between
1) "It's terrible women are penalized" and
2) "Women are penalized, so you should let me run"
But isn't it likely that Sanders meant 1) but Warren (reasonably) heard 2)?
So still a silly debate.
There's a difference between
1) "It's terrible women are penalized" and
2) "Women are penalized, so you should let me run"
But isn't it likely that Sanders meant 1) but Warren (reasonably) heard 2)?
So still a silly debate.
