The winning seat by Donald Trump, an extremist leader, convicted felon with an awaiting penalty of hundreds of millions of dollars and sexual abuser, in this presidential election made an extraordinary example that Kamala Harris, an incumbent candidate, failed as well to break the all-man list of the US President. The election result once again sparked a debate, especially viral in South Asian social media, that the U.S. had once again answered the feminists that female leadership is not good for a progressive nation.
This election was unique, but for many, it boiled down in the end with a simple comparison—the economy. Harris entered the race just 107 days after President Biden’s withdrawal, whereas Trump had over 721 days to shape his campaign and resonate with voters.
Despite being a public prosecutor and experienced politician, Harris’s campaign failed to connect with voters on issues like inflation and unemployment which were widely seen as backlash against Biden-Harris. Aditya Chakraborty, a senior economics commentator, stretches that “populism” which is known with left-wing politics, yet for much of this election, the populists’ modern-day successors in the Democrats have served up “ant-populism.”
Inflation, low wages, unemployment, and immigration emerged as voters’ top concerns. Harris began her campaign by vowing to hunt down on corporate price-gouging, but as the election neared, the focus shifted almost exclusively to abortion rights.
For many, this shift felt as if critical issues were left unattended. Nina Christina, a North Carolina nurse and Trump voter, shared her frustration: “It shouldn’t be this difficult to survive in everyday life. Harris already had a chance to fix the economy.”
America, often seen as a global leader since WWII, should not be mistaken for a standard for all ideals. Professor Jeffrey Sachs explained that in America, ideals exist in two forms: one as genuine ideology practiced by progressive—normative individuals, and the other as a game orchestrated by the CIA—consider, for instance, ‘democracy.’
The first self-governing country to grant women’s suffrage was New Zealand in 1893. Finland, as the first autonomous country, granted both the right to vote and the right to run for office in 1906.
In the United States, the Territory of Wyoming, now the State of Wyoming, granted women the right to vote in 1869. Nationwide, the U.S. extended this right through the 19th Amendment, after WWI, in 1920.
Among first-world countries, the Nordic nations consistently lead in the share of women in government with nearly 50%, particularly Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland. Outside of the Nordic region, New Zealand also performs strongly, yet three female prime ministers have served.
In other major economies, Germany and Canada have achieved significant progress, while Canada arrived at 50-50 of its cabinet ministries.
Apart from that, there are countries like Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Liberia that have had women as presidents.
The United States, lags behind, with women holding only about 27% of seats in Congress as of recent data. But the US has systemic differences.
Undeniably, the Electoral College plays a decisive factor in shaping the outcome. Democrats lost more votes compared with 2020 than Republicans gained. Republicans swept all the seven swing states. Trump’s Seal the Border Promise attracted Arizona the most, where the Mexican immigrant issue vexed voters.
Pennsylvania, a “tipping point” state with 19 electoral votes, is seen as critical for each party. The “Egg-flation” helped to win the battleground. CBS MonyWatch price tracker showed that, since 2017, the average price of a dozen eggs has risen 176%.
Feminism, root linked to the Enlightenment, is not limited to the motion of electing a head of government. It is a discourse still in the stage of ‘means,’ striving toward the ‘end.’ Comparing feminism to misogyny, which is a history-long prejudice, misses the point that feminism is not just about symbolic victories; it seeks to bring women’s experiences, perspectives, and stakes into the decision-making process. Its aim is to reduce chaos and create a world that is representative of all.
Women’s political participation, the interaction between institutions and women’s claims, the creation of spaces where women can thrive in public life—are at the core of feminists’ fight. The goal is to ensure aspects where women are seen, heard, and valued—not as an afterthought but as equal contributors to shaping society.
America, a nation that prides itself on breaking barriers and setting democratic standards, continues to fall short in electing a woman to its highest office. The reason may lie with the culture of American voters rather than the candidates themselves.
Karrin Anderson’s concept of the female presidential paradox highlights “double-blind” that the presidency is framed as an ‘experienced politician’ or as ‘change’—consistently remaining blind in the turn of female candidates but unblind to males. As Anderson notes in his article “Every Woman Is the Wrong Woman,” cultural biases make it nearly impossible for female candidates to overcome this.
Using hypothetical candidates, an experiment conducted in 2017 by political scientists Ono and Burden revealed surprising findings. Although the average effect of a candidate’s sex on vote choice is relatively small compared to the effects of party affiliation and policy positions, its impact on election outcomes could still be decisive. The study found that bias against female candidates predominantly appears among male voters. In the broader population, this bias is most evident among independent voters who do not rely on party affiliation as a cue, and it is more pronounced in presidential elections than in congressional ones.
Although Anderson possesses pessimistic sentiment about the prospect of a female U.S. president, Olga Khazan, an author of “Me, But Better,” suggests a bit of optimism that a female candidate could win if positioned as a “change” candidate during a period of significant economic hardship, allowing voters not to pay too much attention to her gender. This is similar to what happened in 2008.
As nations like New Zealand and the Nordic countries demonstrate, true progress lies in political fabric, not isolated victories. Until the U.S. reckons with the bias, ingrained in its political culture, the Oval Office will remain an elusive goal for women. But feminism’s journey is not defined by one country. It is a global movement working tirelessly to ensure leadership, in all its forms, becomes a shared and equal endeavor.
