The Woman Card
Donald Trump coined this term earlier last month speaking in New York State. He was speaking about Hillary Clinton and her run for president.
“I think the only card she has is the women’s card,” Trump said a short while later in New York. “She has got nothing else going. Frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she would get 5% of the vote. And the beautiful thing is, women don’t like her.”
“She is a woman,” he told Chris Cuomo on “New Day.” “She is playing the woman card left and right. She didn’t play it last time with Obama. But she’s playing it much harder this time and she will be called on it,” he said. “If she were a man and she was the way she is, she would get virtually no votes.”
But as tempting as it is to chalk this whole thing up to a silly campaign moment, there are real questions about whether this “gender card” debate will help or hurt either candidate in the general election moving forward. Research, at least all of the research before Donald Trump arrived on the scene, seemed to indicate that a candidate’s gender is irrelevant. But it seems that this issue is more complicated than it seems.
It’s not just about whether Clinton’s gender will affect the office of President. The idea of the “woman card” being a positive thing is absurd. Men are more likely vote for other men but women are actually less likely to vote for other women, according to polls done on the the 2012 election. The sisterhood of women doesn’t seem to stick that far…
Women receive less pay, less days off and less opportunities for promotion world-wide. What does this mean for us as a gender? Should we stick together and hope for more political leaders? Will more females in office lead to better changes in favor for us? Or should we shift our focus to grassroots change?
Your thoughts and feelings are appreciated on this subject… Let’s start the debate!