WEBVTT - Will we ever see a woman president? 0:00:04.160 --> 0:00:05.880 There Are No Girls on the Internet. As a production 0:00:05.920 --> 0:00:13.600 of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative, I'm Bridgeton and this is 0:00:13.640 --> 0:00:18.760 there Are No Girls on the Internet. Friday, March eighth 0:00:18.840 --> 0:00:21.239 is International Women's Day, and here at there are No 0:00:21.320 --> 0:00:24.279 Girls on the Internet. We're celebrating by taking part in 0:00:24.400 --> 0:00:28.840 Iheartradios Women Take the Mic initiative. International Women's Day has 0:00:28.840 --> 0:00:30.800 always kind of meant a lot to me. It is 0:00:30.840 --> 0:00:33.599 so important to me to be honoring and lifting up 0:00:33.720 --> 0:00:36.440 women all over the world, and I think this year 0:00:36.520 --> 0:00:38.840 I'm doing that while also really wrestling with the fact 0:00:38.880 --> 0:00:42.360 that women both here in the United States but especially globally, 0:00:42.840 --> 0:00:45.560 are facing a lot right now. You know, in times 0:00:45.600 --> 0:00:48.479 of war in conflict, we know that it is always 0:00:48.520 --> 0:00:51.480 women that really bear the brunt, and I guess that's 0:00:51.520 --> 0:00:54.120 just sort of weighing very heavy on my mind as 0:00:54.120 --> 0:00:56.680 I reflect on what International Women's Day means to me 0:00:56.760 --> 0:00:59.160 this year, I do also just want to take a 0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:01.520 moment to honor the women who have supported me and 0:01:01.560 --> 0:01:03.600 helped me to get where I am today. You know, 0:01:03.880 --> 0:01:05.959 I know that I would not be doing any of 0:01:06.000 --> 0:01:07.640 what I am doing if not for the women that 0:01:07.680 --> 0:01:10.319 came before me. You'll hear a bit more about that 0:01:10.480 --> 0:01:13.280 later in this episode. But the woman that I kind 0:01:13.280 --> 0:01:17.160 of modeled my career after was the late Great Gweneifel, 0:01:17.640 --> 0:01:21.600 a journalist and correspondent on PBS. Gweneifel was the first 0:01:21.600 --> 0:01:25.760 woman to host a nationally televised US public affairs program 0:01:25.800 --> 0:01:28.800 with Washington Weekend Review. I actually have a picture of 0:01:28.840 --> 0:01:32.119 her hanging on my fridge right now. My parents always 0:01:32.200 --> 0:01:34.319 watched her on PBS, and when I was a kid, 0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:36.520 it was the first time that I saw a black 0:01:36.560 --> 0:01:40.800 woman have this big career on television, and I always wondered, Wow, 0:01:41.120 --> 0:01:43.720 I wonder if I could do that too someday. You know, 0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:47.280 she really had the quintessential big career that I always 0:01:47.319 --> 0:01:48.120 wanted for myself. 0:01:48.480 --> 0:01:49.640 Like she did it all. 0:01:50.080 --> 0:01:55.360 She moderated presidential debates. In fact, in February of twenty sixteen, Gweneifel, 0:01:55.440 --> 0:01:58.720 alongside Judy Woodruff, became the first team of women to 0:01:58.800 --> 0:02:02.559 moderate a Democratic residential debate, moderating the debate between Hillary 0:02:02.600 --> 0:02:06.280 Clinton and Bernie Sanders. You know, some little girls dream 0:02:06.320 --> 0:02:09.520 of being president, while I did not dream of being president. 0:02:09.680 --> 0:02:11.880 I dreamt of being the woman who asks the person 0:02:11.919 --> 0:02:15.720 who wants to be president, hard questions on television and 0:02:15.960 --> 0:02:19.400 I might not ever have a big career like Gwen Eifels, 0:02:19.720 --> 0:02:22.639 but she really inspired me to want to ask questions 0:02:22.680 --> 0:02:26.000 and challenge myself and others. As women, we should be 0:02:26.040 --> 0:02:31.240 seeing ourselves reflected in government, politics, media, journalism, culture, art, 0:02:31.680 --> 0:02:35.079 and every other place where decisions are being made, including 0:02:35.240 --> 0:02:39.840 the White House. NBC's Ali Vattally has been covering elections 0:02:39.840 --> 0:02:44.200 from the campaign trail for years. Her book Electable, Why 0:02:44.320 --> 0:02:46.800 America Hasn't put a woman in the White House dot 0:02:46.800 --> 0:02:50.400 dot dot Yet takes a sweeping look at one of 0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:53.519 the lingering questions of American elections. At a time when 0:02:53.560 --> 0:02:55.800 more women have run for president of the United States 0:02:55.840 --> 0:02:58.440 than ever before in our history? Will we ever see 0:02:58.480 --> 0:03:02.040 a woman president? Alie and I have been friends for years, 0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:05.000 and I hope that you'll enjoy our conversation about women 0:03:05.240 --> 0:03:07.920 and our White House ambitions throughout history as much as 0:03:07.960 --> 0:03:17.359 I did. So Allie, you have been covering the campaign 0:03:17.400 --> 0:03:20.840 trail pretty much like since I've known you so for Yes, 0:03:21.400 --> 0:03:22.760 what has that been like for you? 0:03:23.639 --> 0:03:25.920 It has been like, I don't know, six or seven 0:03:26.000 --> 0:03:31.760 years now straight of just traveling from Iowa to New Hampshire, Nevada, Florida, 0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:38.520 everywhere in between, constantly just following candidates for Republicans, Democrats, midterms, presidentials. 0:03:38.760 --> 0:03:39.440 We do it all. 0:03:41.520 --> 0:03:43.680 Yeah, I mean, one of the big questions I have 0:03:43.800 --> 0:03:46.680 for you is, having done this for so long, what 0:03:46.880 --> 0:03:48.440 changes have you seen in the way that we talk 0:03:48.480 --> 0:03:52.720 about candidates, especially women, people from marginalized backgrounds, Like, have 0:03:52.800 --> 0:03:55.400 you seen a change since the beginning of your time 0:03:55.480 --> 0:03:56.200 doing this to now? 0:03:57.200 --> 0:03:57.520 Gosh? 0:03:57.640 --> 0:04:00.680 I hope it's changing for the better. I think it's 0:04:00.760 --> 0:04:03.640 changing for the better, in large part because I think 0:04:03.720 --> 0:04:08.640 that media is more comfortable calling out sexism and racism. 0:04:08.920 --> 0:04:12.120 There's not necessarily any more this knee jerk reaction to 0:04:12.240 --> 0:04:15.840 both sides things that just shouldn't be both sides. So 0:04:16.279 --> 0:04:18.480 I look at it, especially through the lens of someone 0:04:18.480 --> 0:04:21.440 like Hillary Clinton. Right in two thousand and eight, the 0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:25.560 media ecosystem didn't necessarily know how to deal with a 0:04:25.600 --> 0:04:28.479 moment about like are you likable enough? Hillary? 0:04:28.680 --> 0:04:28.840 Right? 0:04:28.960 --> 0:04:31.560 Remember that moment on the debate stage with Barack Obama 0:04:31.720 --> 0:04:35.039 or in New Hampshire. Everyone remembers the Obama piece of 0:04:35.040 --> 0:04:37.720 that moment, and he's got a little bit of criticism 0:04:37.760 --> 0:04:41.200 for that but few people remember the fact that it 0:04:41.240 --> 0:04:44.760 was a media moderator who teed that moment up by 0:04:44.880 --> 0:04:49.440 asking Hillary Clinton, voters say that you are qualified, but 0:04:49.520 --> 0:04:52.640 they say that you're not likable, how would you reassure 0:04:52.680 --> 0:04:55.000 them as if likability is something that you need to 0:04:55.040 --> 0:04:57.560 be president, it's nice to have, But like I don't 0:04:57.600 --> 0:05:00.080 think you need to be president if you're only if 0:05:00.080 --> 0:05:03.359 you're a likable person. So people forget that, and I 0:05:03.360 --> 0:05:07.440 think that we have come further, thankfully in the decade 0:05:07.600 --> 0:05:10.440 since that moment, or less than a decade since that moment, 0:05:11.120 --> 0:05:14.720 at least not asking those questions anymore. But the thing 0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:18.120 about sexism, then you know this is it's persistent. If 0:05:18.160 --> 0:05:21.440 it's not likability, it becomes something else. And I would 0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:27.440 argue that in twenty twenty, likability became electability. And that's 0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:29.480 sort of the whole premise of my book, and that's 0:05:29.560 --> 0:05:31.960 really where I start out. The whole thesis is that 0:05:32.080 --> 0:05:35.640 it's fair to want a candidate who's electable, who can win, 0:05:35.800 --> 0:05:37.919 because everyone wants to pick a winner. And certainly in 0:05:37.960 --> 0:05:41.080 twenty twenty, every single Democratic voter that I talked to 0:05:41.640 --> 0:05:44.680 just so badly wanted to pick the person who could 0:05:44.720 --> 0:05:47.880 beat Trump. But the thing about electability is no one 0:05:47.960 --> 0:05:51.839 knows who can actually win until voters vote, and so 0:05:51.920 --> 0:05:54.799 it's really where you assigning your benefit of the doubt. 0:05:55.200 --> 0:05:57.240 And I think the upshot of the book is in 0:05:57.279 --> 0:06:00.520 a whole bunch of different ways we give mail candidates 0:06:00.839 --> 0:06:03.640 much more benefit of the doubt than we do female candidates. 0:06:04.080 --> 0:06:05.960 It's fascinating. The book is fascinating. 0:06:06.080 --> 0:06:07.880 Can can you talk us through some of the ways 0:06:07.920 --> 0:06:10.679 that you see this playing out for women, that women 0:06:10.720 --> 0:06:12.400 are not given the benefit of the doubt the way 0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:14.760 that men are, Because yeah, I could think of some 0:06:15.240 --> 0:06:18.839 recent male presidents who I might say were not the 0:06:18.880 --> 0:06:21.600 most likable, and yet it didn't stop them from getting 0:06:21.600 --> 0:06:22.239 to the White House. 0:06:22.960 --> 0:06:25.760 I mean the first person that I thought of was 0:06:25.880 --> 0:06:28.560 Donald Trump because I would go out on the campaign trill. 0:06:28.560 --> 0:06:31.000 I covered him in the twenty sixteen election and his 0:06:31.040 --> 0:06:32.599 first year and a half in the White House, and 0:06:32.600 --> 0:06:34.400 what voters would say to me all the time was, 0:06:34.880 --> 0:06:37.280 I don't like him. I don't like the way he talks, 0:06:37.360 --> 0:06:39.640 I don't like the way he acts towards people. But 0:06:39.720 --> 0:06:42.440 I also like that he says what is on his mind. 0:06:42.520 --> 0:06:44.440 And I also like that he tells it how it is. 0:06:44.760 --> 0:06:47.360 But I like the policies. I like the judges. They 0:06:47.400 --> 0:06:50.200 found ways to rationalize the fact that they didn't like him, 0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:53.239 but he was strong and they wanted him to be president. 0:06:53.880 --> 0:06:56.080 And with women, what a study that I point to 0:06:56.080 --> 0:06:59.240 in my book has found is that it's not just oh, 0:06:59.360 --> 0:07:01.760 nice to be like everyone wants to be liked. It 0:07:01.880 --> 0:07:05.000 impacts the way that people won't vote for female candidates 0:07:05.040 --> 0:07:07.960 because in the case of someone like Trump, voters will 0:07:08.040 --> 0:07:09.800 vote for a man that they don't like, but they 0:07:09.800 --> 0:07:11.920 are less likely to vote for a woman who they 0:07:11.920 --> 0:07:14.480 don't like. And so it's not just nice. 0:07:14.200 --> 0:07:15.960 To have You have to have it. 0:07:16.040 --> 0:07:17.920 You have to be likable, but then you also have 0:07:18.000 --> 0:07:20.320 to be strong. And the moment that I come back 0:07:20.360 --> 0:07:23.559 to a lot from twenty twenty was this seminal moment 0:07:23.680 --> 0:07:27.320 on the debate stage in January of twenty twenty in Iowa, 0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:30.640 were like two weeks from caucus. All of us are exhausted, 0:07:30.760 --> 0:07:35.280 heavily caffeinated, room of reporters, everyone on stage is very 0:07:35.320 --> 0:07:37.960 on edge, all of the candidates because there's just been 0:07:38.000 --> 0:07:41.400 this leaked meeting that happened between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. 0:07:41.440 --> 0:07:43.840 I'm sure you remember this where Bernie allegedly said to 0:07:43.880 --> 0:07:47.000 Elizabeth Warren, I don't think a woman can win the presidency, 0:07:47.080 --> 0:07:48.920 or I don't think a woman can win the presidency 0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:53.240 against Trump, and Elizabeth Warren, surprise surprise, disagreed with bot 0:07:53.280 --> 0:07:55.200 promise as a woman who was going to try to 0:07:55.200 --> 0:07:57.400 be a woman who took on Trump. And they get 0:07:57.400 --> 0:07:59.760 on this debate stage and I'm covering the Warren campaign, 0:08:00.200 --> 0:08:03.600 and they feel like she's on the record telling her 0:08:03.640 --> 0:08:06.200 side of the story, and no one is believing her. 0:08:06.760 --> 0:08:09.000 And so she goes forward and tries to take this 0:08:09.160 --> 0:08:11.679 moment and make it into one that's like a big 0:08:11.720 --> 0:08:15.200 electability argument. Here's why Elizabeth Warden can win. And she says, 0:08:15.440 --> 0:08:17.480 of all the people that are on this stage right now, 0:08:17.480 --> 0:08:19.840 and she's next to Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders and 0:08:19.880 --> 0:08:22.160 Pete budajigj and Amy Klobashar is the only other woman 0:08:22.240 --> 0:08:24.400 up there. She says, of all the people on this 0:08:24.520 --> 0:08:26.680 stage right now, only two of us have won all 0:08:26.680 --> 0:08:31.160 of our elections, me and Amy Klobashar. And that's the 0:08:31.200 --> 0:08:34.200 reaction that Klobashar had. She's like laughing, chuckling at her 0:08:34.240 --> 0:08:37.400 podium because she knows it's right, and everyone else is 0:08:37.440 --> 0:08:40.439 just up there stoically nodding. And it's a proof point. 0:08:40.480 --> 0:08:42.760 That's a way that you can prove the unprovable, which 0:08:42.800 --> 0:08:44.880 is like, I know, you don't know who's gonna win. 0:08:44.960 --> 0:08:47.280 Come I will talk this day in twenty twenty, but 0:08:47.360 --> 0:08:49.160 I can tell you that every other time I've been 0:08:49.200 --> 0:08:51.880 on a ballot, everyone's voted for me, and up to 0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:54.920 the point that I've won. Same with Amy Klobashar. The men, 0:08:55.280 --> 0:08:57.679 they don't get to say that. Joe Biden, he ran 0:08:57.760 --> 0:09:01.560 for president twice before he ran twenty twenty. He didn't 0:09:01.559 --> 0:09:05.040 win any states outright then they were failed presidential campaigns, 0:09:05.440 --> 0:09:07.640 and yet he was the guy who had the air 0:09:07.720 --> 0:09:11.079 of electability around him in twenty twenty, in large part 0:09:11.440 --> 0:09:15.200 because he was a moderately positioned white male of a 0:09:15.240 --> 0:09:17.920 certain age. And so that's a moment that I look 0:09:17.960 --> 0:09:20.120 at it and I'm like, this is the seminole moment 0:09:20.200 --> 0:09:23.360 where you look at electability as both an important metric 0:09:23.720 --> 0:09:27.079 and also a very heavily gendered one. And part of 0:09:27.120 --> 0:09:29.040 the reason I wanted to tackle it in this book 0:09:29.800 --> 0:09:33.040 is because in the media environment, especially in cable. We 0:09:33.080 --> 0:09:36.480 are moving forward so quickly, doing live shots every hour 0:09:36.600 --> 0:09:39.080 on the hour, and you don't always get the chance 0:09:39.160 --> 0:09:42.480 to unpack things through a gender lens, a race lens. 0:09:42.720 --> 0:09:45.199 You are solely looking at it sometimes through a horse 0:09:45.320 --> 0:09:47.720 race lens. And I really wanted to be able to 0:09:47.760 --> 0:09:51.280 go back over this campaign, especially because all of us 0:09:51.280 --> 0:09:54.719 were stopped in twenty twenty right after Warren dropped out 0:09:54.760 --> 0:09:57.080 because of the pandemic. I wanted to be able to 0:09:57.080 --> 0:09:59.520 go back over it with a heavy gender lens and 0:09:59.600 --> 0:10:03.280 try to explain what's unquantifiable, which is that gender really 0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:05.880 plays a role here. You can't put a percentage on it, 0:10:05.920 --> 0:10:07.240 but that doesn't mean that it's not there. 0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:09.160 Yeah. 0:10:09.240 --> 0:10:12.199 I so, first of all, I just you probably get 0:10:12.200 --> 0:10:13.400 this a lot, or maybe you don't. 0:10:13.440 --> 0:10:13.800 I don't know. 0:10:14.400 --> 0:10:18.520 I get so fed up with the kind of reporting 0:10:18.640 --> 0:10:22.439 that only frames things as a horse race, like who's 0:10:22.440 --> 0:10:25.120 going to come out ahead? Because I do think that 0:10:25.120 --> 0:10:27.280 can be important, but it doesn't really tell us a 0:10:27.360 --> 0:10:29.680 lot about where we are as a people, what we 0:10:29.760 --> 0:10:31.960 care about, what we're thinking about when you're just thinking about. 0:10:31.720 --> 0:10:33.240 It as like who's gonna win. 0:10:33.679 --> 0:10:37.319 I think so much of the nuance about things like identity, gender, 0:10:37.440 --> 0:10:39.920 race gets lost. But we know these things are so 0:10:40.040 --> 0:10:43.320 salient in our world and in our society. So thank you, 0:10:43.480 --> 0:10:46.760 like from the bottom of my heart, for like actually 0:10:46.800 --> 0:10:49.000 doing the work of trying to shade in some of 0:10:49.000 --> 0:10:49.520 that nuance. 0:10:49.559 --> 0:10:52.520 It is so easily lost when we talk about politics. 0:10:52.800 --> 0:10:55.440 But I also think that that's what people are hungry for, 0:10:55.679 --> 0:10:58.720 right Like people are very tuned in right now. That 0:10:58.920 --> 0:11:00.880 is one of the biggest out growths I think of 0:11:00.960 --> 0:11:03.199 the Trump era is the fact that a lot of 0:11:03.280 --> 0:11:06.680 people who might have been casual or non political people 0:11:07.160 --> 0:11:09.439 have started to tune in in a little bit more 0:11:09.440 --> 0:11:11.520 of a consistent way. And I recognize that there's a 0:11:11.559 --> 0:11:13.880 ton of fatigue out there right now, but I think 0:11:13.920 --> 0:11:17.119 that's also why it's important to put things in context 0:11:17.120 --> 0:11:20.199 for people and to explain, like, Okay, this one thing 0:11:20.240 --> 0:11:22.839 happened over here, but it's connected to these ten things 0:11:22.880 --> 0:11:25.240 that happened over here, and oh, by the way, the 0:11:25.280 --> 0:11:27.720 thing that runs under the lens of all of them 0:11:28.120 --> 0:11:31.600 is gender, or is race, or is something else. And 0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:34.040 I think that that's really important. Right if you're going 0:11:34.080 --> 0:11:35.720 to get to be an expert in something, you should 0:11:35.760 --> 0:11:37.959 be able to talk about all the different prongs of it, 0:11:38.080 --> 0:11:40.000 and so I think it's a real privilege to be 0:11:40.000 --> 0:11:42.760 able to explain politics through all of those lenses, not 0:11:42.880 --> 0:11:45.319 just who's going to win, even though you and I 0:11:45.400 --> 0:11:48.679 both know elections have consequences. Sure, But like I do 0:11:48.720 --> 0:11:51.040 think one of the positive things about twenty twenty was 0:11:51.080 --> 0:11:54.280 you had candidates who were running who were putting policy 0:11:54.679 --> 0:11:58.440 at the forefront. The fact that Elizabeth Warren's tagline was 0:11:58.480 --> 0:12:02.960 I have a plan for that wasn't necessarily just about policy, 0:12:03.040 --> 0:12:06.439 though she loves policy, Like these people love policy, let 0:12:06.440 --> 0:12:09.000 me tell you, they love the policy. And also, like 0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:12.160 as someone who's read many of those policy memos, they 0:12:12.200 --> 0:12:15.000 know their stuff. I mean, many of the policy priorities 0:12:15.040 --> 0:12:17.679 that she put forward ended up being the nuts and 0:12:17.760 --> 0:12:20.800 bolts of like the larger Democratic platform once the primary 0:12:20.880 --> 0:12:22.960 was over. But it was also a way for her 0:12:23.320 --> 0:12:27.200 to show expertise, and that's really important for women when 0:12:27.200 --> 0:12:29.079 they are running as well. So like you had candidates 0:12:29.120 --> 0:12:31.280 who were trying to lean in not just to the 0:12:31.320 --> 0:12:34.000 horse race, but who were trying to steer the conversation 0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:37.320 to a policy place as well, and that helps too. 0:12:38.400 --> 0:12:40.080 Yeah, I want to talk a bit about that because 0:12:40.080 --> 0:12:43.719 you talked about the amazing moment of Warren being like, oh, well, 0:12:43.760 --> 0:12:46.840 we've won all of our races the women on the stage. 0:12:47.040 --> 0:12:49.720 Did you think when I think about all the different 0:12:50.160 --> 0:12:56.040 stereotypes and negative misconceptions about women as leaders, I think 0:12:56.080 --> 0:12:58.360 that's and you and I will probably rattle off a 0:12:58.360 --> 0:13:01.440 bunch of them, but I think that one that we 0:13:01.559 --> 0:13:03.400 used to see a lot of is like, oh, women 0:13:03.480 --> 0:13:06.679 are not competent, And part of me feels like it 0:13:06.760 --> 0:13:08.920 has ping gotten to a place where it's like women 0:13:09.000 --> 0:13:11.840 are competent, but like, yeah, she has to be competent, 0:13:11.880 --> 0:13:14.560 but also nice about it. Like I almost wonder if, 0:13:14.640 --> 0:13:17.480 like the if like the stereotype has kind of evolved 0:13:17.760 --> 0:13:21.640 to continue to oppress women and not allow us to 0:13:21.640 --> 0:13:23.240 be the leader, the effective leaders that you and. 0:13:23.280 --> 0:13:24.120 I know that we can be. 0:13:24.400 --> 0:13:26.120 But also it's like, oh, yeah, you can't just be 0:13:26.480 --> 0:13:28.080 a woman who has a plan for everything. 0:13:28.120 --> 0:13:29.760 You also have to be like demurror about it. 0:13:30.200 --> 0:13:31.600 You need to be nice about it. It's like I 0:13:31.600 --> 0:13:33.440 have a plan for everything, but no worries if not, 0:13:33.840 --> 0:13:37.800 you know, but I do think so. First of all, 0:13:37.840 --> 0:13:41.520 the good news is that any like polling or bias 0:13:41.880 --> 0:13:46.160 research that's out there shows that thankfully, public opinion has 0:13:46.160 --> 0:13:49.880 shifted on this idea of female competency, like there is 0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:51.760 now and I point to this in my book, like 0:13:52.160 --> 0:13:54.839 people think that men and women are as competent as 0:13:54.960 --> 0:13:58.920 each other. So yay for very obvious progress. It should 0:13:58.960 --> 0:14:01.400 have never had to be progressed too. But I also 0:14:01.480 --> 0:14:04.440 talk in the book about this idea, and I'm actually 0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:08.040 sure that you feel this too, Like the idea of 0:14:08.120 --> 0:14:11.200 being called a smart girl is something that I dig 0:14:11.240 --> 0:14:13.880 into in my book because it's something that I've been called. 0:14:13.920 --> 0:14:17.320 But it's an example of like words that are coded 0:14:17.600 --> 0:14:21.240 that like, if you are female, you know what it's 0:14:21.360 --> 0:14:23.840 like to have something said to you that kind of 0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:27.240 sounds like a compliment, but like isn't actually a compliment. 0:14:28.360 --> 0:14:30.080 And it's one of the things that I dive into 0:14:30.120 --> 0:14:32.160 in the book in relation to how we talk about 0:14:32.160 --> 0:14:35.760 female candidates, because you're right, there's almost an apology that 0:14:35.880 --> 0:14:38.720 has to come after you assert yourself, or after you 0:14:38.760 --> 0:14:42.440 show how smart you are, or after you actively pursue 0:14:43.320 --> 0:14:45.280 the goal that you're trying to go towards. And there's 0:14:45.320 --> 0:14:47.840 a great op ed that came up during the twenty 0:14:47.920 --> 0:14:50.800 twenty race that said something to the effect of, you know, 0:14:50.840 --> 0:14:53.200 she's the most beautiful woman in the world, but also 0:14:53.280 --> 0:14:56.280 she's very ugly. She's you know, she holds it, she 0:14:56.360 --> 0:14:58.160 knows how to shoot a gun, but also she's never 0:14:58.200 --> 0:15:02.280 held a gun. Like all of these random examples that 0:15:02.320 --> 0:15:05.520 the author gave, and the final one I thought really 0:15:05.560 --> 0:15:08.120 was a gut punch because it was she wants to 0:15:08.120 --> 0:15:11.120 be president, but she'd never run for it. And that's 0:15:11.280 --> 0:15:14.120 almost what we demand in women, is like, we want 0:15:14.160 --> 0:15:16.040 you to assert yourself, we want you to try, we 0:15:16.080 --> 0:15:17.720 want you to be the best. You should strive to 0:15:17.720 --> 0:15:20.720 be the best, but also don't make anyone feel uncomfortable 0:15:20.760 --> 0:15:23.760 that you're in your pursuit of doing those things. And 0:15:23.800 --> 0:15:27.640 that's you know, I think that's something that women who 0:15:27.720 --> 0:15:29.720 are listening to this and who have been in these 0:15:29.760 --> 0:15:33.320 spaces that are still so male dominated. I think that's 0:15:33.320 --> 0:15:36.360 something that a lot of people resonate with. And it's 0:15:36.400 --> 0:15:38.800 part of why I think that the more diverse your 0:15:38.840 --> 0:15:42.040 newsroom gets, the better you'll be it calling out the 0:15:42.120 --> 0:15:46.280 narratives when they start against female candidates. And also you 0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:48.320 won't fall into those traps in the first place, at 0:15:48.400 --> 0:15:49.120 least I hope not. 0:15:50.200 --> 0:15:52.880 Yeah, Oh, that is a gut punch, and I feel 0:15:52.920 --> 0:15:56.160 like I really saw it with Vice President Harris. I 0:15:56.200 --> 0:15:59.520 remember reading someone saying like, oh, she's really like the 0:15:59.800 --> 0:16:02.280 insult that they gave them. They didn't they didn't come 0:16:02.320 --> 0:16:04.360 out and say that it was an insult, but we 0:16:04.440 --> 0:16:07.080 can read between the lines. It's like, Oh, she's ambitious, 0:16:07.120 --> 0:16:09.840 she really wants to be president. And it's like, do 0:16:09.880 --> 0:16:13.080 you think that the men on stage like accidentally filled 0:16:13.080 --> 0:16:15.160 out their paperwork to run for president and they don't 0:16:15.160 --> 0:16:15.920 actually want it. 0:16:15.800 --> 0:16:17.600 It was just some big mistake and now they're. 0:16:17.440 --> 0:16:19.160 On stage day. 0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:22.440 Yeah, it's like, of course she wants to be president. 0:16:22.520 --> 0:16:25.080 That's the point. Everybody on that stage wants to be president. 0:16:25.280 --> 0:16:29.080 That's the point. The fact that it is lobbed at women, 0:16:29.840 --> 0:16:32.640 coded as an insult or coded is like, this is 0:16:32.680 --> 0:16:35.360 why you shouldn't trust them, because they have high end, 0:16:35.400 --> 0:16:39.000 they have high ambitions for themselves, and they want power 0:16:39.040 --> 0:16:42.160 and they want visibility and they're making themselves big, and 0:16:42.200 --> 0:16:45.280 that's something that is to be distrustful of if you 0:16:45.320 --> 0:16:47.120 are a woman or a person, or like a woman 0:16:47.200 --> 0:16:49.520 or a woman of color in particular, Like, yeah, I 0:16:49.640 --> 0:16:53.080 don't see that same thing lobbed at men, even though, 0:16:53.400 --> 0:16:55.440 of course they want to be president. 0:16:55.520 --> 0:16:57.040 Of course they're ambitious. 0:16:57.600 --> 0:17:01.000 Yep, exactly. And that was the word of the vice 0:17:01.040 --> 0:17:04.840 presidential deepstakes, if you remember, right, Biden says he's going 0:17:04.920 --> 0:17:08.280 to pick a woman. A bunch of really amazingly qualified 0:17:08.280 --> 0:17:11.560 women get put on both the public list that the 0:17:11.600 --> 0:17:14.840 media likes to make but also the campaign's list, and 0:17:14.880 --> 0:17:18.560 it's everyone from Stacy Abrams to Kamala Harris, to Elizabeth Warren, 0:17:18.600 --> 0:17:23.160 to Amy Klobashard to Val Deming's, Tammy Duckworth, Gretchen Witmer, 0:17:23.200 --> 0:17:27.120 all of these really amazing women that showcase just how 0:17:27.160 --> 0:17:30.480 much work Democrats have put in to filling the pipeline 0:17:30.840 --> 0:17:36.119 with really good talent and diverse talent, and all of 0:17:36.160 --> 0:17:39.000 them going forward and voicing the fact that they want 0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:41.920 to be vice president, raising their hand and saying, yeah, 0:17:41.960 --> 0:17:43.480 I would do that job and I would be good 0:17:43.520 --> 0:17:47.640 at it. And here's why that got turned into, oh, well, 0:17:47.640 --> 0:17:50.280 they're ambitious, and now we're back to those words that 0:17:50.359 --> 0:17:53.119 sound like they should be compliments, but really they're not. 0:17:53.800 --> 0:17:57.119 And that was I think one of the things that 0:17:57.240 --> 0:18:01.679 felt particularly gendered about process that shouldn't have had gender 0:18:02.000 --> 0:18:06.960 perpolating behind it. At all was the vice presidential beepstakes, 0:18:07.560 --> 0:18:10.000 and that word ambition just reared its head in such 0:18:10.000 --> 0:18:12.560 a negative way. But I think the silver lining to 0:18:12.680 --> 0:18:16.600 it was that what we saw happen was Democratic groups 0:18:17.760 --> 0:18:22.960 formed this whole group of you know, strategists and operatives 0:18:23.080 --> 0:18:27.000 and Emily's Lists and other groups that have been working 0:18:27.040 --> 0:18:31.680 to elevate women across politics. They formed we have her Back, 0:18:31.920 --> 0:18:35.000 and you watched it happen. When they would do live shots, 0:18:35.280 --> 0:18:38.560 they would be asked, Okay, you know who's better suited 0:18:38.560 --> 0:18:41.520 to be vice president? Karen Bass Kamala Harrison And instead 0:18:41.520 --> 0:18:45.400 of comparing, contrasting, tearing one down to elevate the other. 0:18:45.680 --> 0:18:48.720 I watched Valerie Jarrett do this time and again on MSNBC. 0:18:48.880 --> 0:18:51.480 She would say, well, Karen Bass would be a great 0:18:51.560 --> 0:18:54.000 choice for X y Z reason, Kamala Harris would be 0:18:54.000 --> 0:18:56.640 a great choice for ABC reason, and they would both 0:18:56.680 --> 0:18:59.720 be amazing vice president. Period. They did not say anything, 0:19:00.320 --> 0:19:02.480 and they did not pit these women against each other. 0:19:02.480 --> 0:19:04.920 That's not to say that it didn't happen, because politics 0:19:05.000 --> 0:19:08.399 is still politics, but when it came down to it, 0:19:08.480 --> 0:19:12.359 you watch democratic women, especially try not to make this 0:19:12.520 --> 0:19:16.399 seem like a cat fight. And I think that was 0:19:16.440 --> 0:19:19.320 a really big silver lining that makes it better going forward. 0:19:19.400 --> 0:19:23.199 But yeah, Kamala Harris has been a really fascinating person 0:19:23.400 --> 0:19:27.120 rising to the role of vice president because her ambition 0:19:27.560 --> 0:19:30.120 and having run for president beforehand, which by the way, 0:19:30.359 --> 0:19:32.800 Joe Biden did right before he got to be vice president. 0:19:33.119 --> 0:19:34.520 That's somehow being held against. 0:19:37.440 --> 0:19:38.760 Let's take a quick break. 0:19:49.280 --> 0:19:49.960 At our back. 0:19:51.760 --> 0:19:55.520 For women, both in politics or government or just professional 0:19:55.560 --> 0:19:56.160 women in general. 0:19:56.200 --> 0:19:57.760 I'm sure that you get this as a journalist. 0:19:58.680 --> 0:20:01.960 I think that we have this this cultural attitude that 0:20:02.720 --> 0:20:05.960 effort is bad, Like if people can see the effort, 0:20:06.280 --> 0:20:06.960 that's no good. 0:20:07.000 --> 0:20:08.000 It's supposed to look effort. 0:20:08.000 --> 0:20:10.359 You're supposed to like you don't really want it, and 0:20:10.400 --> 0:20:13.600 that you know, if you're good at something, it's just happenstance, 0:20:13.680 --> 0:20:15.680