E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Female candidates across the country saw mixed results in the midterm.
There were ten females running for governor this year. This number ties the records set in 2002 and 2006 for women gubernatorial candidates. Females net three governorships across the country – bringing the total to nine – with the victories of Susana Martinez (R-NM), Mary Fallin (R-OK), and Nikki Haley (R-SC). All are Republican “mama grizzlies” backed by Sarah Palin. Gov. Jan Brewer (R) also won her re-election campaign in Arizona. All female democratic gubernatorial candidates lost their campaign bids this cycle.
A record number of women were also on the ballot for Senate. 15 ran and at least four were successful. The fates of Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) are still unknown as they are deadlocked with their opponents. So far, three incumbent senators out of the six up for re-election won: Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). One new face, Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), will be making her way to Washington as she won her campaign bid in New Hampshire. It’s still unknown if women will retain 17 seats in the Senate depending on the outcomes of the races in Alaska and Washington.
Whether females will gain seats in the House will become known only after the final four race results are decided. Currently there are 73 Congresswomen. 138 females were on the general election ballot, including 69 incumbents. What’s clear thus far for the House is the national trend against Democrats holds – Republican women are gaining seats while their Democratic counterparts are losing seats.
KEY GAINS FOR WOMEN
The success of Martinez, Fallin, and Haley also mark major milestones for New Mexico, Oklahoma, and South Carolina respectively. These women became the first female governors of their state. Martinez is now the first Latina governor in the nation and she and Haley also are the first two women of color to hold gubernatorial positions. Meg Whitman (R-CA), though she lost her bid for governor of California to Jerry Brown (D-CA), self funded more her campaign than any candidate in history – donating $160 million of personal funds – an impressive feat for females.
A BIG LOSS
There is one big loss for women that is very apparent: there will no longer be a female speaker of the house when Congress begins in 2011.
Leave a Comment:
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm more interested in the leadership capabilities of someone in a political office than what's between their legs.
Just sayin'.
More of a "between the ears" kind of person, huh?
That exactly~
So where are all the jobs we were promised?
Ask Obama. He's had two years.
But you guys are all about fairness and equality right?
So to be "fair," come back in two years and ask that of the Republicans.
Who in America is interested in 'fairness?'
We were told that if the Republicans were returned to power, there would be jobs. So where are they?
They haven't even been sworn in yet.
god libbies are stupid.
Michael Thompson, Charlotte, NC
So where are all the jobs we were promised?
A report came out today that more private jobs were added to the economy. If you could keep up you'd know the Republicans, wholly owned subsidiaries of big corporations, sent the jobs offshore.
I bet you are still waiting for that hope and change too...........!!
As a self-employed person I see some hope excpet where I live: California!
Now we have a whole new group of shrill angry partisans, it never ends and they sadly never learn. The republicans didn't win the democrats lost they thought everyone was going to follow their plan. In 06the republicans lost because of the very same attitude. The rather lame political herds who believe Washington is in charge of their lives always have someone else to blame. For 4 years its been republican bitching now its going to be democrats bitching, do us a favor can it for a while, both sides, all you are doing is proving you are nincompoops.
Waitng for Sarah to announce. Will she or won't she? With the red splashed all over the Govenor's map last night......she may not be able to help herself.
pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease!
I think the more women elected to office in this country equals more problems solved without the sabre rattling that goes on now.
Sure they will.
I am so happy to see that MEG in California loose, it just goes to show you what money can't buy. Just think what she could have done with that money to help the poor. Good job MEG, now go try to buy something else.
Redistribution of wealth is Obama's rally cry
You dumb f..k, the 160 mil bought: long haired account execs time and more jobs in major radio and TV stations, lots of car rental money, endless take outs, Pizza's, etc. Lots of gopher jobs, lots of thinker egghead jobs, lots of poll workers jobs, lots of phone bank jobs, and the like. The majority of these jobs were for min or lower wage people (where you fit right in with your IQ. None of it went to banks, bankers and the like. Ms Whitmen funded more people than most mid sized businesses do and it went on for at least 18 months. HURRAY FOR HER, you ignorant libb
Meg wasn't trying to "buy" the election. She was simply putting up her own money to help fund her campaign. It is no different than any other candidate around the nation putting up their own money to fund what they believe in. You saw it all over the nation last night. People are simply tired of how the politicians are running things. So "ordinary" people with NO political experience were putting up their own money to bring some common sense to Washington. I think she did a very noble thing. Just like so many others did.
Doesn't look like gender had much to do with the outcome. Party affiliation seemed to make the big difference. Love her or hate her, Nancy is still the most powerful woman in Congress. It is a fact.
True, but in 2 months she will be the most powerful woman with a 60 seat deficit.
Ron,
She will go down in history as one of the greatest Americans ever sent to Congress.
Thank you Madam Speaker for all you've done to help us.
yep she is powerful, she just can't do very much...
She lost most of her power, she has been the shortest seated lib speaker of any. She cost the taxpayers, lib, or cons about 5 mil a week for her airplane she begged sand coerced for. A gulfstream of course, was way to small for her, her family, and her pets.
Now she will be a threat to no one, her plastic smoothed wrinkles will began to show, her husbands business will not get any more no bid military and industrial contracts and so on. Down with libbs and her on the bottom
The more important question is how will women (and their children) fare under the new Congress.
I find it disheartening that it is easier for women who are identified as "mama grizzlies" to win elections in this country than female candidates who are well-educated and actually proponents of women's rights. This whole Sarah Palin movement is a step backward for women.
Who are You to say what women want? Having five kids, being governer, writing bestselling books, and on top of that being sexy, attractive and feminie are you saying that is a step backwards....??????????
I'd have to disagree, Molly. The women's movement worked for women at the beginning. But now, if you're not career minded, pro-choice, a gay rights activist, and, yes, in many cases a man-hater, you are a worse enemy to them than males. I think the biggest harm they did to women was making them think that having a career was a "must", but if you wanted to be a mother don't give up your career. They were constantly saying, "You can have it all.". Well, we can't and many women felt like failures. I was in the mix of that time and remember the stress that women felt over not being able to do both , but they felt they just had to have careers to be "somebody". The women's movement is no longer about (primarily) women, it's about agendas. They should have applauded Palin for being BOTH a career woman and a mother, because that was what they preached. But, unbelievably they said she should have stayed home with her Down Sydrome child. What hypocrits. Again, You have to follow their "agenda" to be accepted.
Good point, Hope! I envy her.
It's ok Molly, you are a damocrat and obviously never worked in a "man's" world. Catch up with the times honey. People like you are what keeps women down because you are so shallow minded to think that women can't be mama grizzlies and be very intelligent too.
Sometimes you do have to take a step backward to go forward but these moma grizzlies do have educations, they have had very productive and meaningful jobs, they are smart and are exceptionally beleivable. When you compare their backgrounds with the bare arm, empty headed one who made $300,000 a year at a no show job because of dem corruptive practice and donations, they are so much more meaningful people there is no comparison. They are way more down to earth than community orginizers who vote present at decision time. They more than likely got in and out of college with no help from affirmitive action, have real diplomas, are not afraid to say where they were born, and if in service do not lie about where and how they served. YOU IDIOT!
I can not wait to see Senator Jim Demint of South Carolina and his RED NECK Constituancy give up their WHITE HOODS AND ROBES and switch to TURBANS as their Governor is of India descent. It should be funnier than the Bill Mahier,Colbert Washington DC event.
WRONG, it was Klu-Klux Byrd that wore white!
It's easy to ask where are the jobs, but no one seems to look at the beginning of job loss. Why doesn't anyone ever talk about NAFTA? In the words of Ross Perot, "when they pass NAFTA, you will hear the sucking noise of business's leaving this country".
Perot also wrote about NAFTA and American jobs. "NAFTA is really less about trade than it is about investment. Its principal goal is to protect US companies and investors operating in Mexico. The text of the agreement is contained in two volumes covering more than 1,100 pages. The text is mind-numbingly dull. Large portions of it are written in the type of obscure legal terms found on the back of an insurance policy. Buried in the fine print are provisions that will give away American jobs and radically reduce the sovereignty of the US.
Ultimately, NAFTA is not a trade agreement but an investment agreement. NAFTA’s principal goal is to protect the investment of US companies that build factories in Mexico. This is accomplished by reducing the risk of nationalization, by permitting the return of profits to US businesses, and by allowing unlimited access to the American markets for goods produced in Mexico.
Will the House and Congress ever recind NAFTA??
Great-it took Bush and his Nopublican jerks 8 years to practically bankrupt us and most everyone expects Obama to fix it in 2 years. What a bunch of whiny idiots!! In my opinion the Nopublicans will do no better -if not worse,except for their corporate buddies who will, no doubt, make out just fine.
It never ceases to amaze me, two years into a four year term and there is a lack of faith...we didn't get this or that...or when is he bringing the troops home, where are the jobs? Or dump something that has not even taken effect yet...Just how many are still without healthcare? The Republicans say they will deliver...Dems say they can deliver...Independents say neither can and they will deliver...when will the public get it? Ever? We get what we vote for...and as a society exhibit the patience of alley cats....its all about who controls power...who will share in the spoils of polictics...not what will or should be delivered back to the public from taxes paid...by each of us...we should dump all Parties and start from scratch...has anyone ever thought through any of the laws that have been passed? How such laws impacted work in this country? Long range versus short term planning. Asians plan for the future by looking a hunderd years down the road...not next week or next year. We truly have missed the boat! What's in it for me, not for our great grandchildren....and the future of our Country...