Race, Gender and the South Carolina Primary
by PunditMom

With the South Carolina Democratic primary upon us, I'm on pins and needles.

Maybe I'm naive, but I really hadn't anticipated the whole ratcheting up of the gender vs. race issue with the Democrats in the way that it seems to be playing out.

But how can one avoid moving into the waters of identity politics when we have two identity firsts?

At her New York Times blog Domestic Disturbances, Judith Warner wonders:

[I]s it realistic even to hope – as both candidates appear to – that voters will make their ultimate choices based on policy, philosophy and personality differences, and not by falling back on gut-level feelings of racial or gender allegiance?

It might not be.

One pollster says the race and gender of the presidential candidates may play out in a less expected way in the voting booths of South Carolina than on the debate stage.

According to Kathy Frankovic, CBS News director of surveys:

[In South Carolina], nearly nine in ten said a candidate’s race didn’t matter - much like the answers of voters nationally when asked if they would be willing to vote for a black candidate for president.

But the responses are different when it comes to women. One in four voters in South Carolina said they would rather vote for a man - and on that question it didn’t matter whether or not the respondents themselves were men or women. 27 percent of men would rather vote for another man, but so would 23 percent of women. Hardly any women - or men, for that matter - said they would prefer to vote for a woman.

And it's not just women and African-Americans who are wrestling with identity issues.

Lest we forget that we're a nation born from the melting pot, Lisa Takeuchi Cullen at Time's blog Work in Progress wonders what those who fall into more than one identity category should do:

I feel I have a lot in common with Barack Obama. He's half white and half other, like me. In fact, his half-sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng, ... is my own racial mix: half white and half Asian. He's the closest to me in age among all the candidates. He and I both spent a lot of time in Asia and Hawaii growing up. I identify with him in many ways.

I feel I have a lot in common with Hillary Clinton. She's a working mom and always was; I'm a working mom and always will be. She's raised a lovely, grounded young woman, and I am striving valiantly toward that goal. Her husband, like mine, plays a wind instrument, although mine with somewhat greater proficiency. She and I both tend toward elephant ankles, though I'm hoping mine will subside after the pregnancy. I identify with her in many ways.

Herein lies a problem the media tells me I've been grappling with: in a presidential race now fraught with racial and gender politics, with whom does a minority woman identify?

And that's the dilemma for the demographic that pollsters say Clinton or Obama or John Edwards need to win in South Carolina -- black women.

A Zogby/Lifetime poll conducted during the time of the New Hampshire primary showed something interesting to add to the identity mix-- while it was based on a relatively small sample, it showed that minority women were more compelled to vote for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman than they were to vote for Barack Obama as a minority.

But there are some who are also clearly are outraged at the perceived suggestion that black women will case their ballots based either on race or gender. In response to a recent CNN story on the topic, one reader responded sarcastically:

Duh, I'm a black woman and here I am at the voting booth. Duh, since I'm illiterate I'll pull down the lever for someone. Hm... Well, he black so I may vote for him... oh wait she a woman I may vote for her... What Ise gon' do? Oh lordy!

So what roles will gender and race ultimately play in the South Carolina primary? If I could answer that now, I'd be decorating my variety of vacation homes in luxury spots around the world! But it's clear that even thought we'd like to think we only vote based on a candidate's positions and philosophies, other differences play a role, as well.

Submitted by PunditMom (view blog) on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 08:47

Comments

 

All I know is that race and gender WILL play
a role...

None of us are free of gender or racial bias and if we think we are, we are kidding ourselves. How could our ideas, for example, of what constitutes "Presidential material" be anything but influenced by the fact that we have never seen a President that wasn't white and male?

http://theendofmotherhood.typepad.com

Submitted by The End of Motherhood on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 07:02
 

But to pigeon-hole...

...minority women into voting only for race or gender is ludicrous and unfair. Barack and Hillary are NOT the only two viable candidates and the media needs to stop trying to simplfy it down to sex and color. As adults of voting age we are responsible enough and have an obligation to find out where our candidates stand on the issues that are important to us and vote based on those issues. I think that the media is building more out of race and gender than the role it will ultimately play.

Submitted by JenInShanghai on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 07:23
 

I have been hoping ...

... that the media would focus more on just "the woman" and "the African American." Edwards, Biden, Dodd, Kucinich all have viable and interesting ideas. i'm sure the major media outlets could find a way to focus on more than two candidates.

Submitted by PunditMom on Fri, 01/25/2008 - 08:02
 

the media wants us to be conflicted

The question should be about who will make the ideal candidate. Period. Perhaps there might be a different story if the elections were blind (kind of like submitting blind essays/articles to journals for peer review). But then again, were we forced to listen to the candidates on the radio or only read their statement in-print or on the Web, there are voters who would be trying desperately to find signs of being a woman or being black in their texts and words. As a woman of mixed ethnic heritage (or "other" as it read on my last census form) I find that whole issue insults our voter intelligence as women and as black people, and the media is playing into it quite beautifully. Hillary's uterus is not going to lead me to vote for her. Barack's skin tone or "level of blackness" is not going to lead me to vote for him. (And the same goes for any other viable candidate with respect to race or gender.) What will lead me to cast my vote (and I'm sure that others share my sentiment) are the issues and how well it seems that a candidate will be able to lead our nation. Sure, it would be nice to have a ground-breaking historical moment with either a woman or black president of the United States, but will their gender or race and the desire to see such a first occur sway my vote? No.

And I think that nationally, the answer to that question has been proven before. Gerladine Ferraro during the Mondale/Ferraro campaign did not become the first female vice president, not because "the nation wasn't ready" for a woman v.p., but because voters voted on the issues. Jesse Jackson did not become the first black president because voters were voting on the issues. It's not that we weren't ready for a black pres. or a female v.p.--the nation wasn't ready for those candidates as potential leaders. Being black or being a woman are important parts of who both Obama and H.Clinton are, but does anyone really think that when it comes to leadership, Hillary is going to make decisions with her uterus or that Barack will with his skin or ethnic heritage? I hope that the voters in this nation are smarter than that and vote on the issues and who will be able to lead our nation best. It makes me wonder what the media conversation would be like if Richardson were still in the race and in Edward's place.

Submitted by EGeiss on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 10:50
 

I hope you're right

We should not choose a president based on a uterus or skin color, but I think we will have an interesting time dissecting the results of the South Carolina primary.

Submitted by PunditMom on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 19:27
 

I wrote about this

on my site SteveThePenguin.com and here on BlogHer.

Yes, it's clear that factors other that real issues do factor into how people vote. However, none of this race and gender discussion ever came up during the past 20-something years when the candidates were almost exclusively white males. No one was doing polls of white male voters asking them if they were going through some sort of epic crisis since every candidate represented them. And notably, no one is doing that now. Yet I'm supposed to be somehow conflicted because I'm a black woman.

My current inner conflict regarding the Presidential election has nothing to do with race or gender. My current problem is that Dennis Kucinich, the candidate who most represented my goals for the United States, has dropped out of the race, and Now I can't vote for anyone in the primary.

Submitted by Bianca Reagan on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 21:40
 

I agree

I liked Dennis K the best. I will go with my 2nd choice though. Are your other postings anywhere that is NOT a blogspot site. I am in China and the Chinese Government has blocked Blogspot so I can never link to any of the other postings, but am interested in reading them.
Thanks!

Submitted by JenInShanghai on Sun, 01/27/2008 - 03:27
 

Thanks Jen!

Right now I'm just blogging here and on SteveThePenguin.com, which is on Blogger. I am planning to share some of my "classic" posts here, when I have time to transfer them. Can you read Wordpress blogs in China, because I could try that? Also, to tide you over, you can get my book Steve the Penguin on Amazon.com. :)

Do you have a blog, too, Jen?

Submitted by Bianca Reagan on Sun, 01/27/2008 - 12:34
BlogHer

© Copyright 2008 BlogHer | Terms of Service