The Warren and Sanders handshake is conserving us from discussing sexism

Probably the most mentioned moments at Tuesday’s seventh Democratic main debate occurred after it was over, when Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders met for a post-debate dialogue.

Sanders appeared to increase his hand for a handshake as Warren walked over, however no handshake occurred.

Many viewers on social media — and post-debate analysts — described the second as a snub, as Warren refusing to shake Sanders’s hand.

Maybe it was an intentional snub and Warren didn’t wish to shake his hand. It may even have been a clumsy oversight akin to not noticing somebody making an attempt to provide you a excessive 5 or waving to somebody solely to comprehend they weren’t waving at you. It’s even much less clear what they mentioned.

Nonetheless, CNN’s post-debate commentary featured a prolonged dialogue of the second, and on-line Sanders supporters attacked Warren, calling her names and declaring themselves members of a brand new #NeverWarren motion.

In some methods, all the eye heaped on this one second was unsurprising, coming after a number of days of escalating tension between the 2 progressive leaders — all whereas an Iowa caucus that’s successfully any of the highest 4 candidates’ to take looms.

But it surely is also an instance of a media — and human — tendency to permit the minor to obscure the foremost. Making a handshake the largest second of January’s debate has drawn consideration away from necessary issues that knowledgeable it: narrowly, Sanders and Warren working exhausting to bury the hatchet within the title of advancing the progressivism they share, and broadly, conversations across the sexism inherent to questions of whether or not a lady will be president.

Why everybody was so within the Liz-Bernie dynamic, briefly defined

Studying the post-debate change as a snub stems largely from some extent of rigidity that emerged between the senators’ campaigns forward of the talk. Warren and Sanders have had a nonaggression pact all through the marketing campaign, however that truce was damaged following a report from Politico’s Alex Thompson and Holly Otterbein that the Sanders marketing campaign had given volunteers a script that attacked different candidates, together with Warren.

The Warren marketing campaign responded to this by saying Sanders told Warren during a private meeting that he didn’t suppose a lady may win the White Home in 2020. Sanders and his surrogates mentioned the Vermont senator mentioned no such factor. Warren and her surrogates mentioned he did.

The problem got here to a head on the talk stage, with every candidate sticking to their facet of the story. They usually appeared to have settled the difficulty, with each utilizing a query concerning the disagreement to spice up their candidacies and champion their assist of ladies candidates: Sanders argued he’d waited to launch his candidacy in 2016 out of respect for Warren in case she needed to run; Warren identified that the ladies on the stage had much better electoral data — notably when dealing with populist Republicans — than the boys.

Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Photographs

In so answering, the progressives appeared to put a difficulty to relaxation that threatened not simply to distract from their pitches to voters weeks earlier than the Iowa caucuses, however that — given the rancor the disagreement impressed on-line — appeared poised to pettily divide progressives at a second at which they’re struggling to defend in opposition to the nationwide reputation of reasonable Joe Biden.

However the peace and goodwill engendered by the talk itself was largely derailed — among the many senators’ bases at the least — by the second CNN captured after, when no handshake occurred.

You will need to keep in mind, nonetheless, that whereas everybody noticed the identical factor, we don’t truly know what occurred.

We even have little concept what was mentioned within the dialog that adopted. The one data now we have concerning the chat comes from entrepreneur Tom Steyer, who moved away to provide the senators area to speak. Steyer advised CNN the 2 lawmakers have been discussing “getting collectively.” However that would imply something, from a gathering to squash the meat as soon as and for all to a double brunch date. And the dialog may have gone anyplace from there.

Clearly, this little second is getting a lot consideration as a result of the Iowa caucuses at the moment are about two weeks away. Voting in New Hampshire comes instantly after that, then contests in Nevada and South Carolina. In different phrases, time is working out.

Candidates are below monumental strain to distinguish themselves and to win over undecided voters. And their supporters — notably those that have put in numerous volunteer hours — are below simply as a lot pressure.

However in a rush to solid their explicit candidate because the one true good — and a few members of the media’s want so as to add gasoline to a potent narrative — now we have all grow to be distracted from what is absolutely necessary concerning the second: that it’s rooted in very actual considerations over whether or not a lady will be president, and a sexism that lies on the coronary heart of these considerations that very a lot must be addressed.

Democrats want to beat doubts concerning the viability of ladies candidates

Issues concerning the viability of a lady candidate have been prevalent when Hillary Clinton challenged Donald Trump in 2016 and haven’t been resolved since.

“There’s a way that there was backlash concerning the Obama presidency, and Hillary Clinton didn’t win,” Debbie Walsh, director of the Rutgers Heart, advised the New York Times, “So the standard knowledge, which begins to feed on itself, is, ‘Properly, we’d higher simply elect the factor we’ve all the time had,’ which is white males.”

That hesitancy is mirrored in polls on the difficulty, lots of which present people need — or on the very least, don’t have any downside with — a lady nominee, however that they don’t consider different voters really feel the identical.

As an illustration, a July Daily Beast/Ipsos nationwide ballot discovered 74 % of voters mentioned they’d be comfy with a lady as president, however solely 33 % mentioned their neighbors could be fantastic with that. Extra broadly, this dynamic has been framed by way of “electability” — greater than something, voters inform pollsters, they need a Democratic nominee who can beat Donald Trump.

It’s a dialog the candidates on stage have been able to wade into.

“Again within the 1960s, individuals requested may a Catholic may win. Again in 2008, individuals requested if an African American may win,” Warren mentioned. “In each instances, the Democratic Get together stepped up and mentioned sure, received behind their candidate, and we modified America. That’s who we’re.”

And Sen. Amy Klobuchar has routinely made the case she is the candidate with probably the most electability primarily based on her document: she has by no means misplaced an election, and she or he performs effectively in historically Republican districts in her dwelling state of Minnesota. She has additionally outperformed both President Barack Obama and Clinton. In 2012, when Obama carried Minnesota with 53 % of the vote, Klobuchar received 65 % in her Senate bid. Clinton gained solely 9 of Minnesota’s counties in 2016; in 2018, Klobuchar gained 51.

Spencer Platt/Getty Photographs

She additionally pointed to the victories ladies have had over Republicans in recent times, past the wins she and Warren achieved, saying Tuesday, “Whenever you have a look at the info, Michigan has a lady governor proper now and she or he beat a Republican, Gretchen Whitmer. Kansas has a lady governor proper now and she or he beat Kris Kobach.”

As Vox’s Li Zhou has noted, Klobuchar is correct, writing, “Ladies additionally flipped the lion’s share of Home seats that Democrats retook in 2018, in addition to each Senate seats — and analysis has lengthy proven that women candidates win at the same rate as men after they run for elected workplace.”

However that — and Klobuchar’s different arguments — haven’t swayed voters in favor of the Minnesota senator. As an alternative, Biden — who has misplaced elections, and who doesn’t have as sturdy a document of successful in Republican areas — is seen as Democrats’ greatest probability to beat Trump, in accordance with recent polls. And it’s Biden who leads nationally.

Christina Reynolds, a spokesperson for Emily’s Record, advised Vox’s Tara Golshan this dynamic displays what the time period “electability” truly means: “Metrics like authenticity and likability and electability are simply code that we use in opposition to candidates who are usually not like what we’re used to.”

Or as Vox’s Li Zhou has explained, “The expectation of who can win is inextricably wrapped up within the data of who has gained.”

In 2020, something may occur: Trump enjoys some great benefits of incumbency and the electoral faculty system, however consultants have mentioned the Democratic base is extremely energized and is predicted to point out a robust turnout. Respondents to polls might consider Biden has one of the best probability in opposition to Trump, however experts have told Vox that no analysis argues a lady could be destined to lose in November due to her gender.

Democrats have to face these info, however additionally they want to grasp and work to undo the considering that causes voters to take pause with regards to caucusing or voting for a girl.

As an alternative, they’re debating whether or not one candidate snubbed one other’s proffered hand.