To the Editor:
Re “Why Isn’t Harris Running Away With This?,” by David Brooks (column, Oct. 18):
The principal answer to Mr. Brooks’s question is obvious, and it combines two issues: race and gender. Just one of these factors — in a society where racism and sexism are still very much around — would weigh on a candidacy. But few people who feel that way will actually admit to it, so their feelings are unlikely to be revealed in pre-election polls.
The Democrats might have been able to dodge that bullet if Kamala Harris were still running for the second slot, but since it’s now the top one that she’s competing for, negative perceptions of race and gender — unfair as they certainly are — matter.
Hillary Clinton faced a gender challenge in 2016, and it surely played some role in her defeat. Ms. Harris has that one — and she has race too.
I speak as a white man who believes she will make an outstanding president.
Robin Anthony ElliottYonkers, N.Y.
To the Editor:
It’s intriguing that David Brooks discusses political parties as religious organizations and priesthoods, but nowhere mentions Republican gerrymandering or the winner-take-all practice of awarding Electoral College votes.
Were it not for those factors, Kamala Harris would be winning — as Al Gore and Hillary Clinton would have won.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.satta9