Kamala Harris’s loss to Donald Trump marks the second time in under a decade that a woman has come within striking distance of the U.S. presidency, only to fall short. Following Hillary Clinton’s 2016 defeat, Harris’s campaign faced an eerily similar result, highlighting the deep-rooted gender dynamics in American politics. While Trump’s strategic charisma played a significant role in her defeat, the underlying issue was more complex, involving persistent biases and societal expectations.
Trump leveraged his persona as a hypermasculine leader, embracing symbols of power and toughness. From appearances with combat sports figures to praising autocratic leaders, Trump constructed a narrative that resonated with many voters. His rhetoric went beyond the political, delving into personal jabs. He disparaged Harris with terms like “crazy” and “mentally disabled,” and suggested she would be an ineffective leader on the world stage, likening her to a “play toy.” His running mate, J.D. Vance, echoed gendered stereotypes, referring dismissively to women in leadership as “childless cat ladies,” underlining the entrenched biases that still resonate with parts of the American electorate.
The Double Standards Women Face
Harris’s campaign strategy was distinct, focusing on mobilizing women through high-profile endorsements from female celebrities like Oprah Winfrey, Lady Gaga, and Jennifer Lopez. Her platform centered on women’s rights, especially reproductive freedom, aiming to galvanize support across party lines. Yet, this strategy failed to win over the crucial demographic of moderately conservative women. Exit polls showed that while Harris did win the majority of women’s votes, her lead was smaller than past Democratic candidates. Hillary Clinton won women by 13 points in 2016, and Joe Biden by 15 points in 2020. Harris, by comparison, led by just 10 points in 2024, showing a decline in support among female voters.
Public perceptions of female leaders remain rife with contradictions. While voters may claim openness to a woman president, the reality is often different when it comes time to cast their ballots. A poll by The Economist and YouGov revealed that 57% of Americans believe the country is ready for a female president, yet this confidence evaporated at the polls. The ‘pragmatic bias’—the belief that voting for a woman is impractical despite theoretical support—highlights the psychological and cultural roadblocks female candidates face.
Former First Lady Michelle Obama addressed these double standards in a powerful speech, noting that women candidates are expected to constantly prove their worth while men like Trump are held to vastly lower standards. She articulated the relentless scrutiny on women in leadership, saying, “We expect her to be intelligent and articulate… But for Trump, we expect nothing at all.”
Media and Misogyny
The media’s portrayal of female candidates compounds these challenges. Women in politics are frequently subjected to discussions about their appearance, tone, and emotions instead of their policies and qualifications. This distorted narrative can damage public perception, positioning female candidates as less competent or overly emotional. Harris’s campaign faced this, as coverage oscillated between her policies and irrelevant judgments about her demeanor.
While Harris leaned into her role as a staunch defender of women’s rights, many voters were unmoved by her campaign’s focus. The reliance on celebrity endorsements and high-profile speeches may have inadvertently widened the perception gap, where her commitment to advocating for women’s issues was overshadowed by lingering skepticism over her capability to lead a nation that has never known a female president.
The Path Forward
The question remains: Is America ready for a female president? The answer is both complicated and telling. Countries like Estonia, Finland, and Ethiopia have successfully elected female leaders, proving that gendered perceptions of leadership can be overcome. However, the U.S., with its entrenched traditions and power structures, continues to lag behind. The historical record is stark: 46 male presidents in over two centuries. The election of Harris as vice president was a milestone, but her subsequent defeat reveals that breaking through to the highest office is a different challenge altogether.
Overcoming these barriers will require more than one groundbreaking candidate. It will take a sustained effort to challenge stereotypes, reshape media narratives, and put more women in visible positions of power. Representation matters—not just in theory but in practice. Each election cycle that features female candidates chips away at the perception that leadership is inherently male. Figures such as Hillary Clinton, who made history as the first female nominee of a major party in 2016, Elizabeth Warren, and Tulsi Gabbard, who ran in the 2020 Democratic primaries, have all contributed to this shift. While Harris’s loss may seem like a setback, it is part of a longer journey toward parity.
Read More: Warner Bros. Embarks on Developing First Game of Thrones Film
The political landscape is shifting, but deep-seated biases persist. Until these attitudes change, the U.S. will continue to struggle with the idea of a woman president. Yet with each campaign, the possibility inches closer, signaling hope for future candidates who may finally shatter that glass ceiling.