Nearly one hundred years since obtaining the right to vote, women in America have steadily seen hard-fought gains in political representation. Yet the highest office in the land, the American presidency, has eluded more than 200 women who have sought the Oval Office.1 The 2020 election may change this reality forever, as, for the first time, five highly qualified women are running for the presidency. A win by any of these leaders would bring the nation one step closer to its promise of representative democracy, and would have tremendous implications for representation and governance in both the American political process and around the world.
Gender representation in governance is far from equal, but has progressed since 1992
“It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union. And we formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them; not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to the whole people - women as well as men,”
So declared Susan B. Anthony in a speech soon after her arrest for casting a vote in the 1872 presidential election. At the time, such an act was illegal for women.2 Although she would not live to see it, the work of Anthony and other suffragettes would eventually lead to the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, which finally granted women the full rights of citizenship, including the right to vote.3
One century later, the same nation that once arrested Anthony for attempting to vote now has five qualified women running to lead it. The road to gender equality in American society has been long, hard-fought, and remains far from complete, as women continue to make 81 cents on the dollar from their male coworkers and the Equal Rights Amendment remains unratified by the states.4,5 However, progress, particularly in the past four decades, has been undeniable. A record 102 women currently serve in the 435-member House of Representatives, while 25 women serve in the 100-member Senate, representing the highest rate of women in Congress ever at 23.7 percent of the overall body.6
Much of that progress has come since 1992, which is remembered as the Year of the Woman.7 In fact, nearly two thirds of the 325 women who have served in the House of Representatives have been elected since 1992, and 52 percent of the women in the Senate have taken office since 2000.8 The seeds for this change may have been planted in the year prior, 1991, when Anita Hill, a law professor at Brandeis University, testified before an all-male, all-white Senate Judiciary Committee that her former employer, and then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, had sexually harassed her in a previous workplace. The insults and dismissiveness faced by Hill during those hearings enraged and activated an unprecedented number of women to run for office, and eventually sent 28 new female legislators to Washington.9
Women have been the most activated segment of the electorate since the 2016 election
The recent 2016 presidential election marked a breakthrough moment in American politics for gender representation. For the first time, a major party nominated a woman for President: Hillary Clinton. Clinton was an exceptionally qualified candidate to run for the Presidency, having previously served as a First Lady, Senator from New York, and Secretary of State.
Clinton was met with an opponent uniquely hostile to women, one who had previously referred to certain women as “fat pigs,” “slobs” and “disgusting animals.”10 Donald Trump mocked a Fox News anchor for having a menstrual cycle, insulted the appearance of one of his Republican opponent’s wives, and bragged about committing sexual assault on tape.11 Since winning the presidency, he has codified his rhetoric into policy, by rolling back contraceptive access, reversing sexual assault protections on college campuses, withholding federal funds from organizations that provide reproductive health services, ending report requirements on pay inequality, and nominating two Supreme Court judges that have demonstrated hostility towards abortion access.12
The events immediately following the election of Mr. Trump foreshadowed a deep cultural shift: the day after his inauguration marked the largest one-day protest in the nation’s history, with an estimated 4.2 million people participating in Women’s Marches in 600 cities around the country.13 According to one Pew Survey, nearly six in ten women said they were paying more attention to politics since the 2016 election, compared with 46 percent of men.14 One poll by Elle found that 74 percent of all women reported feeling infuriated by the news at least once per day, and that 57 percent of women were angrier in 2018 than they were the previous year.15
These women were not only paying attention, but also turning their anger into action. As implementation of the President’s agenda started to affect women’s everyday lives, Democratic women began to mobilize in the political process at unprecedented rates. One survey by Lake Research Polling demonstrated that 86 percent of those participating in daily actions such as calling or texting their legislators were women, and 77 percent of them were “very likely” to protest again in the future.16 More than 40,000 women contacted EMILY’s List, the American political action committee for Democratic women, expressing interest in running for political office in the 2018 election cycle, up from 920 for the 2016 cycle.17 Donations to female congressional candidates increased by 36 percent from the 2016 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.18
One final, formative event crystalized many women’s perceptions of the Trump Administration and its posture towards women. On July 9th, 2018, the President nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh as his nominee to fill a vacant seat on the Supreme Court. As credible accusations of sexual assault by Judge Kavanaugh were uncovered, the Administration refused to reconsider the nomination. September 27th, 2018 marked the day when Judge Kavanaugh and his accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, a professor of psychology from California, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.19 Carrying echoes of the Anita Hill hearings almost two decades prior, the nation once again watched as a woman faced pointed questioning and thinly-veiled incredulity before another majority-male committee, especially from the Republican side of the dais. Recent polling by PerryUndem indicates that the Kavanaugh hearings, in particular, caused 50 percent of voters to “think about disproportionate gender and power dynamics in government” and as a result, made them twice as likely to vote for Democrats.20
These factors all converged to catalyze tremendous gains for women in the 2018 midterm elections. 112 women were elected, winning more seats in Congress than ever before.21
Women of color, and particularly black women, are leading American democracy
When news broke that Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore had been banned from a mall for bothering teenage girls, and as nine women stepped forward accusing Moore of similar behavior, most believed that his candidacy was going to crumble.22 Yet in the days and weeks following the news, Moore kept the race even, and lost to his Democratic opponent by less than two points.23 As exit poll data emerged, it was uncovered that support from white women in Alabama had kept Moore’s candidacy afloat: Moore had won the vote of 63 percent of white women, while a staggering 98 percent of black women voted for his opponent, Doug Jones.24
The Alabama election serves as a reminder that women cannot simply be grouped together as a uniform electorate. Recent data shows that women of color are the fastest growing electorate in the American political process, and represent 55 percent of the growth in eligible women voters since 2000.25 When activated, women of color, and black women especially, can participate at disproportionately high rates, a phenomenon that researchers believe occurs due to the presence of high levels of social capital among black women, which allows them to more easily “cooperate with others and participate in collective civic endeavors.” 26,27 In the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections black women turned out in record rates and voted by a 96 percent margin to elect and then reelect President Obama.28
However, it must be noted that despite this critical role in Democratic politics, the concerns of and opportunities for women of color have not always been prioritized on the policymaking stage. Black women, despite comprising 7.3 percent of the national population, hold less than 1 percent of all statewide elected positions, and in 242 years of American history, a black woman has yet to be elected governor of any state.29 Some of the issues that matter most to them, whether voting rights, access to transportation, or health care, are in need of targeted and sustained attention from policymakers.30
Enter 2020: May the best woman win
In social psychology, the “glass cliff” phenomenon refers to an instance— usually, but not always, seen in business – when women are elevated to positions of power during periods of crisis.31 The two University of Exeter psychology professors who coined the term, Michelle Ryan and Alexander Haslam, hypothesized that since companies are aware of the importance of shareholder confidence, they may utilize such a strategy “to signal to the shareholders that radical change is on the way” to improve the status quo.32 The election of United Kingdom Prime Minister Theresa May is a recent example of this phenomenon: a modest politician for most of her career, she was thrown into the Premiership suddenly in 2016 after David Cameron resigned and the men likely to replace him backed out, leaving her responsible for navigating the complicated process of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.33
The international image of the United States has neared historic lows around the world since the 2016 election, while the vast majority of Americans believe that their children will be worse off when they grow up than they were, as studies show that upward mobility has declined precipitously in recent years.34,35,36 Meanwhile, social injustices remain prevalent, as exemplified by the young migrant children that remain in cages at the border, indicating that the nation may be approaching the point of crisis where it seriously considers a female head of state.37
Within this context, five highly qualified women running for the Democratic nomination have emerged, most of whom have led the fight against the President’s agenda.38 Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has voted against more Trump Cabinet nominees than any other senator, while Senator Amy Klobuchar has stood out as one of the toughest questioners of the President’s most recent Supreme Court nominee. Senator Elizabeth Warren has consistently called out the rampant corruption in the President’s administration, and has offered a suite of policy prescriptions to reduce corruption in government and restructure the American economy. Senator Kamala Harris has taken the Administration to task on issues ranging from immigration to climate change to judicial appointments.39 Even Representative Tulsi Gabbard, a long-shot candidate best known for her controversial views on foreign policy, has contributed her perspective as an Iraq War veteran to shed light on the current Administration’s foreign policy blunders.40
Representation matters – both domestically and abroad
The United States currently lags behind other nations on equal representation of women in governance. According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, 24.3 percent of the world’s parliamentarians in both upper and lower houses consist of women. This puts the United States Congress just below average, even after the record-breaking 2018 midterms, with women making up 23.7 percent of all representatives and senators. Meanwhile, 70 countries, or 35.9 percent of the world’s countries, have had some sort of female executive leadership throughout their history.41
In this the glass cliff phenomenon may once again be relevant, as most of those countries that have experienced female executive leadership did so only after undergoing some type of crisis. According to Pamela Paxton and Melanie Hughes, authors of Women, Politics, and Power: A Global Perspective, of those countries with female leadership: “19 percent of women came to power after a period of political transition, 45 percent came to power in countries with a recent history of instability, and 33 percent after a military takeover.”42
Recent research has also demonstrated that there is a powerful “role model effect” when women run for office. In the context of the United States, the election of a female Attorney General results in a 2.00 point increase in female representation in the next cycle of the state legislature, while a female Governor and female Senator lead to a 2.36 and 2.88 point jump, respectively.43 This effect carries through in the international context, with the election of a woman in one municipality being “associated in the next election with an additional female candidate in 10 percent of its neighbors.”44 Moreover, gender representation can have contagious effects: Countries in which neighboring countries have gender representation in legislatures and cabinets, tend to have this themselves.45
All of this information is relevant in the context of the American presidency, one of the most high-profile jobs in the world. Not only would a female presidency carry significant implications for gender representation within the United States, but it would unmistakably send a message to women and young girls abroad that they too belong in the political process.
In addition to the larger representational effects, the 2020 Democratic primary also expands the view of the type of woman who can serve in elected office. “With more women in the race you’re less likely to become a caricature of ambition and more likely to have your qualities come to the fore and be examined,” according to Jennifer Palmieri, Secretary Clinton’s former communications director.46 This may allow for a more nuanced discussion of their individual strengths and weaknesses, unburdened by the lazy stereotypes that are otherwise often placed on female candidates. From motherhood to the military, from professor to prosecutor, from brown to black: the women running in the current primary show that public service has many different faces, regardless of profession or race, and that the highest office in the land must not be limited to one type of person.
New forms of governance – both in type and tenor
The type of legislation promoted by female politicians tends to be different than that promoted by men, though it is important to note that limited research exists for female executives in government. Female legislators tend to sponsor more bills in areas like civil rights, health, and education, while men focus more on matters related to agriculture, energy, and macroeconomics.47 Women governors also focus much more on issues of social welfare, even while accounting for partisanship and other situational factors, than their male counterparts.48 In foreign policy, female legislators tend to support lower amounts of military spending and less force abroad, but female heads of state tend to be more willing to use force internationally and usually increase a country’s military spending.49
Due to the diversity and large number of the female candidates in the field, we’ve seen candidates branch out from these previous norms in their policy proposals. For example, while Senator Warren has focused on social welfare in the traditional sense through her proposal for universal child care, she is also focusing her political efforts on the structural issues in the economy that hurt the welfare of families, from breaking up America’s biggest tech giants to addressing the wealth gap as it relates to housing.50 Senator Harris has shown a similar unwillingness to get boxed in on the stereotypical ‘women’s issues,’ answering when asked:
“I’m so glad you want to talk about the economy. It’s a woman’s issue to care about climate change. It’s a woman’s issue to want comprehensive immigration reform … It’s a woman’s issue to care about so many of these things.”51
Not only do female public servants differ from males in the types of policy issues that they traditionally prioritize, but they also differ in the approaches that they take towards governance. Research indicates that women interrupt less, pay more attention to nonverbal cues, and have a more democratic leadership style than men, all of which leads to a coalition-building and consensus-driven governance style.52 Their increased representation in governance also correlates with a lower rate of corruption,53 perhaps due to the so-called “Jackie (and Jill) Robinson Effect,” which indicates that only the most talented, hardest working female candidates succeed in the political process due to the barriers already placed against them.54
At a time of growing political polarization but an increased national desire to see compromise, as well as diminished trust in institutions,55,56,57 Americans demand less corruption and more consensus in government. A female head of government could bring a new perspective uniquely suited to this moment, with widescale implications for policymaking at home and abroad.
In her landmark book on women’s anger, Good and Mad, American author Rebecca Traister writes, “[W]hile the vision of women storming the ramparts of government was radical from one vantage point, it was as American as the idea of representative democracy laid out by our forefathers.”58 In the 2020 election, at the centennial of the women’s right to vote and with a record-breaking number of women running for the highest office in the land, the United States has the potential to move closer to the more perfect union articulated by the Founders. Doing so has the potential to change the face of leadership in the United States and around the world, and lead to a new era of American governance at home and foreign policy abroad.
Jasneet Hora is a second year MPA student at Columbia SIPA, where his coursework has focused on identifying the major social policy issues confronting the United States, while his research has been focused on identifying new communications strategies to engage the American public in addressing these issues. A California native, he studied Political Economy and Public Policy at UC Berkeley before providing research support at the Obama White House and at FWD.us, an advocacy organization focused on passing comprehensive immigration reform.
1 Lewis, Danny. “Victoria Woodhull Ran for President Before Women Had the Right to Vote.” Smithsonian.com. May 10, 2016. Accessed March 20, 2019. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/victoria-woodhull-ran-for-president-before-women-had-the-right-to-vote-180959038/.
4 Sonam Sheth, Shayanne Gal. “6 Charts That Show the Glaring Gap between Men and Women’s Salaries.” Business Insider. April 02, 2019. Accessed April 19, 2019. https://www.businessinsider.com/ gender-wage-pay-gap-charts-2017-3.
5 Epps, Garrett. “The Equal Rights Amendment Strikes Again.” The Atlantic. January 20, 2019. Accessed April 19, 2019. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/will-congress-ever-ratifyequal-rights-amendment/580849/.
6 DeSilver, Drew. “A Record Number of Women Will Be Serving in the New Congress.” Pew Research Center. December 18, 2018. Accessed March 26, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/facttank/2018/12/18/record-number-women-in-congress/.
7 Strauss, Alix. “Key Moments Since 1992, ‘The Year of the Woman’.” The New York Times. April 02, 2017. Accessed April 17, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/02/us/02timeline-listy. html.
9 “The Year of the Woman, 1992 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives.” Year of the Woman, 1992 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives. Accessed March 25, 2019. https://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/WIC/Historical-Essays/AssemblingAmplifying-Ascending/Women-Decade/.
10 Ross, Janell. “So Which Women Has Donald Trump Called ‘dogs’ and ‘fat Pigs’?” The Washington Post. August 08, 2015. Accessed April 20, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/08/so-which-women-has-donald-trump-called-dogs-and-fat-pigs/?utm_ term=.0706defba266.
11 The Irish Times. “’Fat Pigs’ and ‘slobs’: Trump’s History of Sexist Outbursts.” The Irish Times. October 09, 2016. Accessed March 23, 2019. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/fat-pigs-andslobs-trump-s-history-of-sexist-outbursts-1.2823012.
12 “How Life Has Changed For American Women One Year After Hillary Lost.” EMILY’s List. Accessed March 24, 2019. https://www.emilyslist.org/news/entry/how-life-has-changed-for-americanwomen-one-year-after-hillary-lost.
13 Frostenson, Sarah. “The Women’s Marches May Have Been the Largest Demonstration in US History.” Vox. January 31, 2017. Accessed March 25, 2019. https://www.vox.com/2017/1/22/14350808/ womens-marches-largest-demonstration-us-history-map.
14 “Since Trump’s Election, Women Especially Pay More Attention to Politics.” Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. September 24, 2018. Accessed March 27, 2019. https://www.people-press. org/2017/07/20/since-trumps-election-increased-attention-to-politics-especially-among-women/.
15 Harris-Perry, Melissa. “Women Are Angrier Than Ever Before-and They’re Doing Something About It.” ELLE. November 06, 2018. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/ a19297903/elle-survey-womens-anger-melissa-harris-perry/.
16 Savitsky, Shane. “Middle-aged Women Are Leading the Anti-Trump Resistance.” Axios. March 20, 2017. Accessed March 26, 2019. https://www.axios.com/middle-aged-women-are-leading-the-antitrump-resistance-1513301325-4232cf1e-8f38-4624-9829-f8b1b2894d2c.html.
18 Zernike, Kate. “The Year of the Woman’s Activism: Marches, Phone Banks, Postcards, More.” The New York Times. November 03, 2018. Accessed March 24, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/ us/politics/women-activism-midterms.html.
19 Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, and Nicholas Fandos. “Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford Duel With Tears and Fury.” The New York Times. September 27, 2018. Accessed April 19, 2019. https://www. nytimes.com/2018/09/27/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-hearings.html.
20 “PerryUndem Research/Communication - Kavanaugh Ford Survey Report_F - Page 53 - Created with Publitas.com.” Publitas. Accessed April 19, 2019. https://view.publitas.com/perryundem-researchcommunication/kavanaugh-ford-survey-report_f/page/53.
21 Zhou, Li. “It’s Official: A Record-breaking Number of Women Have Won Seats in Congress.” Vox. November 07, 2018. Accessed March 27, 2019. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/7/18024742/midterm-results-record-women-win.
22 North, Anna. “The Alabama Election Shows Exactly Why Feminism in 2018 Can’t Just Be about White Women.” Vox. December 13, 2017. Accessed March 28, 2019. https://www.vox.com/policy-andpolitics/2017/12/13/16772760/roy-moore-alabama-election-doug-jones-feminism.
23 “Alabama Election Results: Doug Jones Defeats Roy Moore in U.S. Senate Race.” The New York Times. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-specialelection-roy-moore-doug-jones.
25 Harris, Maya. “Women of Color: A Growing Force in the American Electorate.” Center for American Progress. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/ reports/2014/10/30/99962/women-of-color/.
27 Farris, Emily M., and Mirya R. Holman. “Social Capital and Solving the Puzzle of Black Womens Political Participation.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 2, no. 3 (2014): 331-49. doi:10.1080/21565503.2 014.925813.
29 Dittmar, Kelly. “The Chisholm Effect: Black Women in American Politics 2018.” Center for American Women and Politics. February 24, 2018. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/sites/ default/files/resources/chisholm_effect_black_women_in_politics.pdf.
30 Carter, Charly, and Carol Lautier. “Taking Our Seat at the Table: Black Women Overcoming Social Exclusion in Politics.” Demos. November 20, 2018. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.demos. org/sites/default/files/publications/Taking Our Seat at the Table Black Women Overcoming Social Exclusion in Politics.pdf.
31 Ryan, Michelle K., and S. Alexander Haslam. “The Glass Cliff: Evidence That Women Are OverRepresented in Precarious Leadership Positions.” British Journal of Management. February 09, 2005. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00433.x.
33 McGregor, Jena. “Congratulations, Theresa May. Now Mind That ‘glass Cliff.’” The Washington Post. July 12, 2016. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/ wp/2016/07/12/congratulations-theresa-may-now-mind-that-glass-cliff/.
34 Wike, Richard, Bruce Stokes, Jacob Poushter, Janell Fetterolf, Richard Wike, Bruce Stokes, Jacob Poushter, and Janell Fetterolf. “Trump Unpopular Worldwide, American Image Suffers.” Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. October 23, 2018. Accessed April 20, 2019. https://www.pewglobal. org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/.
35 “Chapter 3. Inequality and Economic Mobility.” Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. June 01, 2015. Accessed April 21, 2019. https://www.pewglobal.org/2013/05/23/chapter-3-inequality-andeconomic-mobility/#real-divisions-in-faithin-economic-mobility.
36 Tankersley, Jim. “American Dream Collapsing for Young Adults, Study Says, as Odds Plunge That Children Will Earn More than Their Parents.” The Washington Post. December 08, 2016. Accessed April 21, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/08/american-dream-collapsing-for-young-americans-study-says-finding-plunging-odds-that-children-earn-more-than-theirparents/?utm_term=.fb401d166400.
37 Images, Sergio Flores/The Washington Post/Getty. “The Trump Administration Is Caging Hundreds of Migrants Under a Bridge.” The Cut. March 29, 2019. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://www.thecut.com/2019/03/migrants-being-held-under-bridge-in-el-paso-what-we-know.html.
39 Korecki, Natasha, Charlie Mahtesian, Natasha Korecki, Stephanie Murray, and Elena Schneider. “’Breakthrough Moment’: Anti-Trump Fires Forge Historic Field of 2020 Women.” POLITICO. February 11, 2019. Accessed April 30, 2019. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/11/2020-womencandidates-democrats-1162670.
40 Rodrigo, Chris Mills. “Tulsi Gabbard Throws Cold Water on Trump-Kim Denuclearization Talks.” TheHill. February 26, 2019. Accessed March 29, 2019. https://thehill.com/policy/international/asiapacific/431554-tulsi-gabbard-throws-cold-water-on-trump-kim-talks.
41 Geiger, Abigail, Lauren Kent, Abigail Geiger, and Lauren Kent. “Number of Women Leaders around the World Has Grown, but They’re Still a Small Group.” Pew Research Center. March 08, 2017. Accessed March 30, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/08/women-leaders-aroundthe-world/.
44 Gilardi, Fabrizio. “The Temporary Importance of Role Models for Women’s Political Representation.” University of Zurich. January 22, 2015. Accessed March 30, 2019. http://fabriziogilardi.org/resources/ papers/diffusion-women-rep.pdf.
45 Scherpereel, John A., Melinda Adams, and Suraj Jacob. “Gender Norms and Women’s Political Representation: A Global Analysis of Cabinets, 1979–2009.” Governance. June 03, 2013. Accessed March 30, 2019. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gove.12044.
46 McCammond, Alexi. “2020 Puts ‘likability’ Criticism of Women Candidates to the Test.” Axios. January 04, 2019. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.axios.com/women-candidates-2020-presidential-election-7cb99c59-b7bd-45c6-b6f5-1d203cfd40af.html.
47 Volden, Craig, Alan E. Wiseman, and Dana E. Wittmer. “Women’s Issues and Their Fates in the US Congress | Political Science Research and Methods.” Cambridge Core. July 08, 2016. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods/ article/womens-issues-and-their-fates-in-the-us-congress/817B6C136C6CC03F4A13514A93E4AAEA.
49 Fulton, Sarah, and Michael Koch. “In the Defense of Women: Gender, Office Holding, and National Security Policy in Established Democracies.” The Journal of Politics. January 14, 2011. Accessed March 31, 2019. http://people.tamu.edu/~mtkoch/Koch Fulton JoP.pdf.
50 Alemany, Jacqueline. “Power Up: Warren Is Leading the 2020 Battle of Ideas.” The Washington Post. March 11, 2019. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/ powerup/2019/03/11/powerup-warren-is-leading-the-2020-battle-of-ideas/5c8581991b326b2d177d604 2/?utm_term=.2324b5694b49.
51 Mallenbaum, Carly. “Here’s How Sen. Kamala Harris Answers Questions about ‘women’s Issues’.” USA Today. June 14, 2017. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2017/06/14/kamala-harris-women-in-film/102837716/.
52 Eagly, Alice, and Blair T. Johnson. “Gender and Leadership Style: A Meta-Analysis.” University of Connecticut. January 1, 1990. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1010&context=chip_docs.
53 “Women and Corruption: What Positions Must They Hold to Make a Difference?” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. April 06, 2018. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0167268118300933?via=ihub.
54 Anzia, Sarah F., and Christopher R. Berry. “The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson Effect: Why Do Congresswomen Outperform Congressmen?” American Journal of Political Science. April 04, 2011. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00512.x.
55 Jones, Bradley, and Bradley Jones. “Republicans and Democrats Have Grown Further Apart on What the Nation’s Top Priorities Should Be.” Pew Research Center. February 05, 2019. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/05/republicans-and-democrats-have-grownfurther-apart-on-what-the-nations-top-priorities-should-be/.
56 Gallup, Inc. “Americans Favor Compromise to Get Things Done in Washington.” Gallup.com. October 09, 2017. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://news.gallup.com/poll/220265/americans-favorcompromise-things-done-washington.aspx?g_source=link_newsv9&g_campaign=item_225065&g_ medium=copy.
57 Bishop, Bill. “Americans Have Lost Faith in Institutions. That’s Not Because of Trump or ‘fake News.’” The Washington Post. March 03, 2017. Accessed March 31, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost. com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/03/americans-have-lost-faith-in-institutions-thats-not-because-oftrump-or-fake-news/?utm_term=.f915b24e1856.