Kamala Harris is facing criticism from every angle.
Many are questioning how she ended up losing the election.
Now, one newspaper has uncovered a shocking truth about her that will be hard for liberals to accept.
As Conservative Reboot reports:
“Sexism” Has Become a Common Accusation After Harris’s Defeat
Kamala Harris’s defeat was very difficult for some people to take, and in many cases these people raced for the easiest and most comfortable explanation, that she lost because she is a woman.
This has become a common theme in left-wing discourse about Harris’s defeat, but it is a bit too cute, as it excuses her or these same left-wing activists from any responsibility.
It also allows them to continue to pursue the same political agendas without feeling like they’re hurting the cause.
But one newspaper just published an article that is telling the hard truth to people who think like this.
It’ll be hard for liberals to take, but it’s a necessary dose of medicine.
As it turns out, Kamala Harris did not lose because Americans hate women.
She lost because she was not a particularly good candidate, as she proved herself back in 2020 when she fumbled away the primary.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Reminds People That Sexism Isn’t the Real Reason
According to an op-ed in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “In the shocked sputtering, bitter outbursts and just plain mourning in some quarters over the second election of President Donald Trump, the one-word explanation for the outcome is ‘misogyny.’”
“The only ‘newer, fresher explanation’ anyone has hunted down is the not-so-new one, ‘racism.’ To be sure, there are some ugly woman-haters out there, but as election analysis, misogyny just doesn’t hold water.”
“What if American voters would actually like to elect a woman, just as a majority elected Barack Obama twice?
“What if the kinder and truer explanation for America not having done so is that neither party has yet found a strong enough candidate — particularly not in the fraught Trump era?”
These explanations, racism and sexism, are simply too easy for people on the left, and they don’t ring true.
The racism part is easily debunked, as people had no issue voting for Obama. And the sexism part ignores the fact that Democrats keep putting up bad female candidates.
The article continues, “The deeper you dig into voter demographics, the more likely it seems that our great divide is class. More people voted not by racial and gender identity but for the candidate whose vision and experience brought more hope and opportunity into their lives.”
This is an accurate description of what took place in the election, and it is unfortunate that so many people are resistant to the idea that a woman could get elected if they just nominated a better one.
Democrats twice have nominated women who are perceived as either overly-calculating, in the case of Hillary Clinton, or unprepared for the job, in the case of Kamala Harris.
There are certainly tons of women throughout America who would not be perceived in such a way, and if either party would nominate one of them, they would stand a fighting chance of winning.
