猫咪社区

When Americans voted this fall, the candidates on their ballots did not reflect the diversity of the United States.听, women and people of color still聽聽as frequently as White men. In part, this is because they face聽.听When former U.S. Rep. Katie Hill launched her campaign for Congress in 2017, for example, Democrats told her聽.听

In Alabama, meanwhile, when Adia Winfrey was exploring a 2018 run for Congress, a senior party official told her there was  continuing with her nascent campaign. The problem? As a Black candidate, she seemed unelectable.

And in Michigan, 2018 congressional candidate Suneel Gupta, an Indian-American, heard similar concerns. , the rationale from some local Democrats was, 鈥淚鈥檓 not racist, but my neighbor is racist 鈥� so I don鈥檛 think you鈥檇 be a strong a candidate.鈥�

As a  and former congressional candidate, I think these comments reflect a subtle yet pervasive form of discrimination in politics. It鈥檚 something I call 

Other People鈥檚 Views

Strategic discrimination occurs when a party leader, donor or primary voter worries that others will object to a candidate鈥檚 identity. As a result, these key actors may not endorse, fund, or vote for candidates who fall outside the norm because of their race, gender, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. 

The problem is not direct bias or animosity. Rather, strategic discrimination is driven by concerns about other people鈥檚 views. As was on , even liberals who typically value diversity can  if they think .

In , for example, Black Democratic primary voters said they saw promise in Kamala Harris鈥� candidacy, but they hesitated to support her because they worried America wouldn鈥檛 elect a Black woman. Strategic discrimination typically occurs before a primary election. Of course, party leaders want to support candidates who share their policy views. But they also want to win. So when they are deciding whom to support, party chairs, delegates, donors, and elected officials make speculative, anticipatory judgments about how candidates will perform in the general election.

In this  of politics, diverse candidates are at a sharp disadvantage. In , I鈥檝e found that Americans see hypothetical White male candidates as more electable than equally qualified Black women, White women and, to a lesser degree, Black men. The perceived electability gap is especially severe for women of color.  show that Black women are viewed as much less competitive than either White women or Black men. Compared to a White man with the same education and experience in elected office, a Black woman is nearly a third less likely to be considered 鈥渧ery electable.鈥�

The term 鈥渆lectable鈥� has long been part of the American political lexicon, and the buzz around  has only  as political polarization has increased. This poses a problem for women and people of color seeking to enter politics, because electability is a . For one of , in 2019 the  surveyed a nationally representative sample of nearly 2,000 Americans.

Most respondents said that large percentages of other Americans would not be willing to vote for a female or Black presidential candidate. On average, they guessed that 47% of Americans would not vote for a woman presidential candidate and 42% would not vote for a Black presidential candidate. Yet public opinion research suggests that only  to  of Americans might refuse to vote for a presidential candidate based on race or gender. 

Americans have a long history of believing others are . , even as Americans personally came to oppose racial segregation, they incorrectly believed that others still supported it. According to , such misperceptions can 鈥渁ct as a brake on social change,鈥� anchoring decision-making in the prejudices of the past. 

Overcoming Discrimination in Politics

Today, a  exists in politics. Although women and people of color win their elections at , they are seen as less competitive. Instead of taking a , party leaders and primary voters may  whose prospects for success feel more certain. That鈥檚 strategic discrimination鈥攁nd it shapes who is able to become a viable candidate and who appears on the ballot on Election Day. This matters because women and people of color  in politics. 

So what can candidates do to overcome strategic discrimination? How can they garner the money and institutional support needed to become viable candidates? In one of my , I found that when subjects read messages emphasizing the importance of Black voter turnout, they saw Black candidates as more competitive. 

Success stories from demographically similar candidates may also help. For example, when the subjects in my study read about the  of 鈥攁 Black woman who defeated a White male incumbent in a 鈥攖hey thought female and Black candidates would be more capable of winning in 2020. 

However, in the real world of politics, this approach is far from foolproof. 

Many of the  argued unsuccessfully that 鈥�.鈥� And  sought to boost his perceived electability by emphasizing that Black voter turnout would be key to beating Donald Trump. Yet none of these candidates ended up as their party鈥檚 nominee. 

An alternative strategy is to quash doubts about electability by notching key early victories. When Barack Obama began his first presidential campaign in 2007, many  were  that White people would support him. But Obama gained  when he won the Iowa caucuses, proving that yes, a Black man could win even in the Whitest corners of America. 

Most candidates will not be able to replicate Obama鈥檚 narrow path to victory. Nonetheless, as diverse  continue to  in the U.S., they may eventually succeed in  about who looks like a winner in politics.

This article was originally published by . It has been published here with permission.