How Did Women Do? (Updated)
November 3, 2010
by Anna Belle Pfau
|Here at TNA headquarters we have a slogan: Show us the women! This year we saw a historic 252 races involving female candidates. Now that election day has passed, it’s time to begin the analysis. We saw the women, but how well did they do?
We’ve taken the data from Rutgers Center for American Women in Politics and crunched a few numbers to see what happened. Here’s what we’ve collected so far:
Women did pretty well over all. We have so far won nearly half the seats women ran for, which is itself an improvement and puts this aspect of electoral politics almost on par with men.
Despite some notable losses, women have made gains. Four new women will soon swear in as Lt. Governors of their respective states, and three new women will be sworn in as Governor. Republicans have so far sent eight new women to the House, while Democrats are sending four new women. In addition, Republicans will send one new woman to the Senate, and Democrats managed to hold all of their female Senators except for Blanche Lincoln. Depending upon the outcome of races in Alaska and Washington, women may hold their numbers in the Senate. This despite the doom and gloom headlines of summer that women might loose percentages of women in legislative offices.
It wasn’t a total win, though. Five women running for open-seat governorships lost their races, though two of them were running against another woman, giving something of a gain. Only one female incumbent Lt. Gov. lost her seat. Nine female incumbent Representatives lost their races, but that number is offset by the combined total of 12 pick ups between the two major parties. As with the Senate, women are unlikely to lose their percentage of representation in the House this year. In the case of the House, they may slightly increase it.
Of course, the story of the day is the erasure of the “gender gap.” For the first time since exit polling began in 1982, women split almost evenly between the parties, 49% Dems to 48% Reps. This was a shift of more than 12% from recent elections.
What are your thoughts on yesterday’s election? What trends are you noticing? Who are you rooting for to win the “too close to call” races?
UPDATE: I’ve been tracking the CAWP numbers (linked at the top) and adjusting races as they are called. Two on the Too Close To Call list have lost, Alex Sink for Governor in Florida and Cary Kennedy, up for State Treasurer in CO. Our numbers on Governorships are certain now that Sink has conceded. We will break even on Governorships because Linda Lingle(HI) and Jennifer Granholm (MI) are term limited, and because Jodi Rell (CT) did not seek reelection. Thus we will lose three and gain three.
Until the WA and AL races are called, we will not know if we have lost any ground in the Senate.
Right now, we have 73 confirmed wins for women in the House with 4 races TCTC. If those four win, we will not lose any ground.
However, as I said in comments:
Keep in mind that this was a Republican wave year. That women may only lose one or two in the House is phenomenal, given the amount of women in the dem caucus compared to reps. Thank goodness Republicans ran so many women to offset those loses.
I would just add that wave elections are another good reason for women not to put all their eggs in one party’s basket. We risk a wipe out when we do. We avoided that this year by successfully encouraging Republicans to run and elect women.
In my analysis this morning, I’m thinking of this as a pipeline election. We’ve put a number of good candidates in the queue. It’s not as a big a step as I’d wanted, but it’s something.
One thing we are going to have to do is strategize around this issue of sexism. Sexism cost a number of candidates their seats this year, Meg Whitman being front and center. We saw some novel, if losing, strategies this year to deal with it, most notably from Crystal Ball and Christine O’Donnell. We need to get creative and confrontational about sexism. That’s the next battle.
What I am enjoying is that a higher percentage of the Republican women who ran won compared to the Democrats who ran. What that says to me is that Republican women can win and will win if enough of them are in the pipeline. Being a woman on a ticket is not a losing deal and especially being a Republican one.
As I said yesterday, the earth will still rotate on its axis and those with active uteri will not be relegated to back alleys as the Bogeyman would like you to believe.
We need gender balance in both parties and it was good to see that the Republicans are one step closer to that balance.
“Of course, the story of the day is the erasure of the “gender gap.” For the first time since exit polling began in 1982, women split almost evenly between the parties, 49% Dems to 48% Reps. This was a shift of more than 12% from recent elections.”
That is great! I actually watched Corporate Media last night and I didn’t see that story covered. I guess they think that if they don’t talk about it it didn’t happen.
Thanks for this AB! Posted it on my FB page!
Great Story AB!! Thanks for crunching the numbers… It is good to see that if we work at it, we can get results.
Imagine if more women joined our efforts to eliminate sexism in the public discourse, and to get more women in high level positions in the public and private sectors…
I hope we see more women join TNA in our efforts!
Well Democrat women don’t see the alleged sexism in Corporate Media and their Party so they won’t be able to eliminate it. But it would be nice if more people signed on to eliminate sexism in politics and the media. From the election analysis I have been listening to today Democrats feel they have “messaging problem” with the simple minded voters. We just don’t understand!
This isn’t Senate or House or Governor, but Kamala Harris will be the first woman and first African-American attorney general of California.
Cooley almost declared victory but she had a last minute surge in voting.
Didn’t Alabama vote in their first African American woman to congress last night too? Terri Sewell is her name. Also two new “firsts” for African American Republican men were made in South Carolina and Florida. Balance and Diversity are good things.
I had a great night! We had an election party and watched the returns come in. One of the best things about believing in the 30% solution and just voting for women, is that every election is a celebration. To really put some frosting on the cake, I got to watch Ferraro and Palin, the only two women ever to be VP nominees, appear on TV together. Woohoo! And 3 states got new female governors.
great to have these numbers. very disheartening to see Whitman, Fiorina, Donnell and Angle loose and guys like Jerry Brown, Reid and Coon win. Patty Murray is now almost 2% or 28000 votes ahead of her challenger. of course here in Maryland no one can stop the democrats. the “it takes two to tango” judge (on rape) got re-elected. the ominous board of education who is deaf to parents concerns got reelected. I am fine with Mikulsky, who with the governor was the the only one who supported Hillary in our state.
great that women are now represented in both parties, but the sexist attacks still worked. the guys who want women in the kitchen or out for their eye-candy prevailed. this message is equally important to take in as the gains. I think
Claire, I’m excited about Kamala Harris! When I went to bed last night she was trailing–good news indeed.
I don’t really know anything about TNA (is this an org for Rep women?) But it seems like gender shouldn’t be the sole criteria we look for in the candidates we support. O’Donnell and Angle have both made statements that are completely insulting towards women–and Fiorina and Whitman only seem to care about the women (and men) who are white and upper-middle class. As women and advocates, don’t we damage our credibility when we support candidates solely because of what’s between their legs–rather than the strength of their ideas?
In 25th NY Congressional Race Anne Marie Merkle (R)is a few hundred votes ahead of Incumbent Dan Maffei. They still have 6000 absentee ballots to count. When Anne Marie wins she will be the first woman to represent Syracuse!!! WhoOT!
That’s Buerkle…oops need my morning coffee.
Sabrina,
Um, no. We damage our credibility when we continue to elect men “who know what’s best for us” instead of taking charge ourselves.
I don’t think it was a great election for women at all. Apparently there will be a slight reduction in female representation in congress. This is the first time that has happened in thirty years.
The headline at Huffington Post right now shows that probable incoming committee chairs are all male (same as before, but with fewer minorities.) No improvement there.
Only one challenging senate candidate, Ayotte, won. Angle, O’Donnell, Fiorina, McMahon, Carnahan, Conlin and Johnston lost. Several incumbents won, but Lincoln lost and Murkowski’s fate remains uncertain.
We no longer have a woman Speaker of the House.
The new governorships are exciting, but not surprising given that two of the contests were woman vs. woman.
Women’s representation (assuming, which looks likely) Murray and Mulkowski win stays the same (we might net lose 1-2 seats in house – maybe).
Women are going to have to re-adjust to looking at wins in a non-partisan fashion if we are to advance.
Claire: An African American Woman is now LT Gov in Fla too
First of all, how you view this election will depend on your politics. If you’re a partisan Dem, it’s going to hurt a whole lot more. If you’re a partisan Rep, you’re going to be happier. Moderates are another story.
Keep in mind that this was a Republican wave year. That women may only lose one or two in the House is phenomenal, given the amount of women in the dem caucus compared to reps. Thank goodness Republicans ran so many women to offset those loses.
So we lost Speaker Pelosi. We may gain Bachmann as Conference Chair, the fourth most powerful position in the House. Personally, I feel a lot better now that we have more women on both teams. It’s nonsense to put all our eggs in one party basket.
Finally, if Sabrina is voting for Dems based on their abortion stance, she’s voting based solely on what’s between her legs.
Did you all see this “interview” of Michelle Bachmann by Chris Matthews. I saw a clip of it on Gretta’s FOX show.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chr.....tized-you/
Anna Belle,
Sabrina’s post does not mention abortion or single-issue voting in any way. Why make that assumption about her?
Sugar Snap: Sabrina was regurgitating the liberal rational for only voting for Dems which are mostly male so she set herself up. Sabrina says we are a “Republican” group because we support all women and then she repeats liberal media blather about Republican women candidates. So let me just state we are Parity People, we seek parity in government representation. We feel it makes a stronger and healthier country than a bunch of political dogma spouting fanatics running government. If you want to waste your time trying to define us as wingnuts go ahead. It seems to be a need of “Progressives”.
Although I haven’t seen an open discussion in media about Democrats losing the female vote I did see discussions on several networks about Obama replacing Biden with Hillary in 2012. So on some level they do understand the Dems problem with women. They still don’t understand that because of the sexism which was unleashed by Democrats to get Obama installed, I and many other women will never vote for him regardless of who is VP. In fact I don’t see myself voting with Dems for a long time. The Republicans seem to “get it” I may not have liked Bush but he appointed women and minorities to positions of power. I want an admission of wrong doing and regret from Dems, then I want to see what both parties have to offer me.
I didn’t make that assumption. That’s what the word “if” means.
That said, most women who make the argument Sabrina made are making it because they want women to vote Democrat. What they are actually saying is that they get use their uterus as criteria, but I don’t get to use my uterus as criteria. It’s a stupid argument that’s costing women on the left a lot of support, so perhaps they should stop making it.
gender is more than the reproductive organs.
gender voting is an unusual concept because a whole lot of women still believe that women are less capable in the men’s world like politics. to believe that female candidates are capable needs to be learned by many. and this election showed progress in that respect.
the advertisement that only democrats care for women’s issues is as wrong as all the other adds we see. and last pro- abortion as pro-women is a very questionable concept. against unwanted pregnancy or unwanted impregnation would get me thinking pro-women.
My question about being a Republican group was just that–a question. How dare I, I suppose.
The hard thing for me to wrap my head around is supporting a woman like Angle–who compared carrying your rapists child to making lemonade out of lemons–or O’Donnell, who was a complete embarrassment. Yes, I’m pro-choice–but I care just as much about education, the environment and the economy. I don’t see how we advance by supporting any woman who runs, even if she’s unqualified or offensive. Can’t we be committed to electing more women to office while still having standards?
Angle–who compared carrying your rapists child to making lemonade out of lemons–or O’Donnell, who was a complete embarrassment.
Reid (Angle’s male democrat opponent) is anti-choice. And, just out of curiosity, just how much band-width have you spent calling Rand Paul, or Scott Brown or any other of the dozens of male tea-partiers “a complete embarrassment”?
Yes, I’m pro-choice–but I care just as much about education, the environment and the economy.
And you’re going to get more on that from Reid? Please show how you came up with that conclusion.
Hey Ladies,
Just thought you might be interested in these posts:
http://www.alternet.org/story/.....fight_back
http://www.nameitchangeit.org/.....-in-the-2/
Happy post-election re-hash.
Thanks for the links Susan. I am glad to see that the Women’s Media Center states we still live in a “sexist media culture” rather than we still live in a sexist culture. In fact the Media cultures does not reflect United States culture. In the USA we have no choice of what media abominations we subsidize when we sign up for cable. We simply get the “one size fits all males 15-55 with IQ under 70″ load of Corporate Schlock because that is what the men who run media find appropriate for us all. There are no consumer choices so consumers who merely want clear reception on PBS are in no way responsible for this sexist schlock.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
May 8, 2012 at 11:30 am
May 8, 2012 at 9:56 am
May 7, 2012 at 2:04 pm
May 7, 2012 at 1:37 pm
May 7, 2012 at 1:19 pm
April 20, 2012 at 12:57 pm
April 11, 2012 at 4:39 pm
April 6, 2012 at 1:18 pm
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...