Back in 1997, three scholars, Richard Seltzer, Jody Newman and Melissa Voorhees Leighton examined every state legislative race from 1986 to 1994 and every governor's race, U.S. House race and U.S. Senate race from 1972 to 1994. Combined, they analyzed almost 62,000 candidates. They divided the races into three categories: Male incumbents vs. female challengers, female incumbents vs. male challengers and male non-incumbents vs. female non-incumbents.Hillary Clinton didn't lose because the U.S. voters were sexist. She lost because she was a horrible candidate with a long history of corruption and failure at everything she touched and because she failed to stand against the ongoing invasion of the USA.
The results were unambiguous: When women run, women win just as often as men do.
Our study found no difference between success rates for men and women in general elections. Based on the overwhelming weight of the data gathered, the conclusion is clear: A candidate's sex does not affect his or her chances of winning an election.
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
Sexism in politics
As usual, the article of feminist faith proves to be false once examined: