via iStock Photo/Sean Locke

Women candidates for president or vice president have been far and few between in our lifetimes. Until 2008, to see any woman on a national ticket, regardless of party, was a rarity.  Sure, there were a couple of famous exceptions like Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm and U.S. Senator Carol Moseley Braun.  But it’s pretty well accepted that the first viable run for the White House by a woman was when now-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sought the 2008 Democratic nomination.  As for the vice presidential slot, the major parties have each had exactly one woman nominee — Geraldine Ferraro for the Democrats in 1984 and Sarah Palin for the GOP in 2008.

Fast forward to the 2012 race and Palin is finally, officially, out after months of teasing voters with her maybe-I-will-maybe-I-won’t-bus-tour.  GOP Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is still in, but her poll numbers suggest she won’t be for long.  And while she has repeatedly said she won’t, plenty of Hillary fans hope she’ll change her mind and give President Obama a run for his money.  So with women candidates on our minds now more than ever before in our history, have the 21^st century candidacies of Clinton, Palin and Bachmann created a new segment of women voters – ones who will turn away from political races that don’t include a woman?

Studies have shown that women traditionally participate less in politics – both in running for office, as well as in discussing the candidates – than men.  The interest of women and girls of all ages in attending political speeches or volunteering for candidates seemed, at least anecdotally, to be super-charged by the presence of strong, focused women on the tickets three years ago.  Throngs of mothers with little girls turned out just to see Palin on the campaign trail.  Mothers of Hillary-loving daughters became first time campaign volunteers because their girls were so excited about the historic nature of Clinton’s candidacy.  So in a 2012 race that looks like it will soon have no estrogen, what happens to the engagement and excitement of women voters?

While I don’t think women will ignore the next presidential race, I suspect many will feel less invested in the outcome if the race is filled with a sea of men.

So with the GOP frontrunner status being a moving target, having shifted from Bachmann to Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Ron Paul, and the knowledge that women make up the majority of voters, keeping women interested will be the key winning the GOP nomination in 2012.  As for the Democrats, some observers believe that women voters are still licking their political wounds in light of President Obama’s win over Clinton and that progressive women will, at the very least, decamp from the Obama ranks for someone else.  All of this is hard to predict with more than a year to go before Election Day 2012.  But one thing is certain – no one can win without the women’s vote, so whoever really wants to be living in the White House on January 21, 2013, had better find a way to effectively engage them so they don’t focus on the fact that there’s no one at the debates wearing heels and hose.

Unless Betty White really is in the race.  Now there’s a candidate I could support!

Originally posted at iVillage.com.

For months, many vocal Republicans have begged Christie to toss his hat in the ring.  And for months he’s replied no, no and NO!  Every time someone suggested that Christie, who has been in office for less than two years, should get into the race for his seemingly no-nonsense approach to governing, he was firm in his response, saying his focus was on governing New Jersey.  But politicians are only human.  With so many admirers, supporters and party big-wigs, including Henry Kissinger, pleading for Christie to change his mind and, in essence, suggesting that he was the only candidate who could save the Republican Party, it had to be intoxicatingly difficult to stick with his original answer.

So after his short-lived reconsideration, why not make all those fans happy and get in the race, where a true front-runner has yet to emerge?  Could it have been family reasons? NBC’s Jamie Gangel quotes her sources as saying that his wife and four children were on board and ready to take on the campaign if Christie changed his mind.  Political baggage? All candidates have some, and Christie’s isn’t particularly pretty.  He’s notorious for snapping at voters and reporters if he doesn’t like what he’s been asked.  For example, when one mother asked how he could advocate for cutting public school funding when he sends his own children to private school, he angrily retorted it was none of her business.  His weight?  I doubt that’s the reason, but his girth was definitely the focus of politicos’ attention in the last few days instead of Christie’s positions on public education or the economy.

There will surely be some more speculation about why Governor Christie made this decision, but the more important question is this – is the Republican party in the midst of an existential meltdown? Those running are afraid to anger the small but vocal tea party.  Republican voters don’t seem happy with any of the choices – the title of frontrunner has gone from Michele Bachmann to Rick Perry to Herman Cain.  And with another Republican debate on the horizon and the current level of voter dissatisfaction, don’t be surprised if the crown gets passed to someone else very soon.

The Republican candidates still in the race dodged a political bullet with Christie’s announcement, but they have to view this collective desire to add another candidate to an already crowded field as a wake-up call that they all have to work harder to prove they’re worthy to American voters.

So with another debate coming up, who do you think the new frontrunner will be?  Does Christie’s decision open the door a little wider for Sarah Palin?  Or should we believe Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann, when she says he’s the man to beat?

Originally posted at iVillage.com.

Image via The Moderate Voice

Most pundits and politicos say there’s no way that Sarah Palin is going to run for president in 2012 because time has run out.  She’s dragged her feet and teased us with her coy ‘I’m thinking and I haven’t ruled it out‘ comments.  But that analysis relies on old school political reasoning that no one would run for President of the United States unless they actually wanted to be President of the United States.

It’s no secret that Sarah Palin doesn’t play politics the old-fashioned way.  She’s made it very clear that campaigning for her is just as much a function of keeping any spotlight on her, as it is about speeches, policy papers and kissing babies.  And that’s why I still believe that Palin is going to jump in the race soon and mix it up with the other candidates for a couple of months.  I know she’s still a FOX News commentator and that supposedly means she’s sworn on Roger Ailes Bible that she’s not in the race (they cut Newt Gingrich and others loose when they said they wanted to run), but Palin is a different case.  She’s real star power for them.  I’m sure Ailes had no problem bending his own rules for her.

Looking for proof?  Here are five reasons I think it will still happen:

1. Deadlines? She don’t need no stinking deadlines!  I have no doubt that all the paperwork is ready and someone is on call to file the necessary forms in the primary states she’s interested in.  Don’t worry — they’ll make it in just under the wire.

2. It’s too late? Getting into the race at this point in 2011 is only late if your goal is actually to become President of the United States.

3. Media lost interest? When have the media ever lost interest in Sarah Palin if she wants the attention.  Two words — Bus. Tour.

4. Field too crowded? Republicans are still praying for the likes of Chris Christie or Jeb Bush to announce a presidential bid.  Mike Huckabee anyone? If it’s not too late for them, it’s not too late for Palin.

5. Mama grizzlies still love her. Don’t count them out.  Palin was the long cool drink of water in the desert for Republican women in the 2008 election.  They loved her then and they’ll love her now. And they’ll still love her when she drops out of the race for “family reasons.”

For Palin to “win,” she just needs to be a presidential candidate long enough to look legitimate, so she can increase her speaking fees and then play something of a kingmaker for the actual election.   And then maybe another TV show?  If we’re done with seeing her in Alaska,  maybe Julia Louis-Dreyfuss will even make room for Palin in her pretend vice presidential digs?

Image via Huffington Post

Originally posted at iVillage

You KNOW you want it!  Once Sarah Palin announces her 2012 Presidential candidacy, good luck trying to find one of these babies!

And while I was out shopping for this, I wandered into the dangerous territory of taking PunditGirl, who now has to change outfits three or four times before heading to school, to stock up on T-shirts and tops since she outgrew everything over the summer.  What used to be a relatively painless outing is now a browsing and fashion analysis extravaganza.   The full scoop on this mother/daughter outing is at my Babble Voices column, PunditMom’s Spin Cycle!

It’s not really a pretty picture when you consider how the GOP front-runners are keeping our attention:

1. Herman Cain has a gospel album.

2. Tim Pawlenty is going mano-a-mano with late-night talk show host Conan O’Brien and his Team Coco on Twitter.

3. Michele Bachmann can’t escape the slavery issue.

4. Jon Hunstman seems to think a video of a lone motorcyclist racing across the desert will take conservatives’ minds off the fact that he just finished a two-year stint promoting President Obama’s policies in China.

5. Sarah Palin hopes that a Newsweek cover and accompanying article that amounts to a love letter from Tina Brown will put her back on the political motherhood map that Bachmann has taken from her.

6. And poor Mitt Romney is left wondering how the hell he ended up being the Republican candidate whose financial war chest can’t seem to buy him the attention he needs to get close to Pennsylvania Avenue.

As a progressive, all of this makes me happy about the prospects of keeping a Democrat in the White House until at least 2016, but none of this is good for the political process as a whole.  Not that the liberal side of politics isn’t taking its share of hits with a bizarre fascination with Michelle Obama’s personal eating habits and the Obama 2012 team’s apparent belief that a White House Twitter party is a productive step on the path to keeping online supporters engaged (and contributing money).

There’s no doubt that the financial crisis we face is of critical importance and it is truly scary to think that there are a handful of Republicans who are absolutely willing to jeopardize the global economy, and the financial futures of all our children, for the sake of getting the White House back to push their conservative social agenda.  But what is contributing equally to the fact that we’re staring into the face of political and economic doom is the quality of candidates who think they’re the best their party has to offer and that they think they can win with some slick promotion and quirky personalities.

Or is that our fault as ADD news consumers and apathetic political participants?

“Flake” and “balloon head” are just the beginning from those who can’t get their own heads around the idea of challenging Bachmann on her political views rather than dusting off the usual sexist political playbook.

Many GOP leaders were huge Bachmann fans as she rallied her Tea Party base on their issues, but as she started making noise about going head-to-head with the “more serious” or “more likely” Republican candidates like Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich and others, her GOP BFFs have gotten a little distant.   They don’t call, they don’t write.  Once upon a time Republican Congressional leadership was happy to bask in whatever conservative spotlight Bachmann provided for their political agenda, but that all changed when the upstart mom of 28 made it clear that she wasn’t afraid of the big boys.

I hope that Bachmann knows it’s going to get a lot worse than that.  Of course she’s going to have to get out her history book and brush up on a few facts as some of her critics have pointed out, but that’s an easy fix.  If Bachmann is  really in this race to win (which I’m not sure she is — I think she wants to position herself for a role in the future  GOP leadership espcially after the current crowd snubbed her in 2010), she needs to steel herself for the full Hillary treatment.  I’m not sure Secretary of State  Clinton would be comfortable commiserating with Bachmann on how to navigate the entrenched sexism against women who seek political power, but in my head I’m imagining that her advice would be something like this:

1. Let other people deal with the whole “balloon head” thing and ignore it. The Hillary Nutcracker got lots of coverage, but I don’t remember her dignifying it with a response.  No matter what you say, those old boy male pundits are going to keep finding ways to suggest that there’s no need to take political women seriously, and they’ll use whatever adjectives or questionable collectibles to do it.

2. Some things will call for a snappy retort, so be ready. Remember ” iron my shirt”? Best not to leave that one hanging out there, so you might want to brainstorm with your staff about keeping a few good soundbite-sized responses at the ready for the hecklers.

3. Don’t believe them when they tell you you’re making excuses for other things if you call out the sexim when it happens.  High-profile media men and women alike scoffed at the suggestion that the never-ending sexist comments had an effect on Hillary Clinton’s candidacy.   Clinton may not have lost as a direct result of the constant drum-beat of anti-woman rhetoric, but she was certainly undermined to an extent that when other things happened, voters were able to use the barbs as another reason to turn away from her.

4. Don’t think you’re safe with your GOP brethren.  Immediately after the recent CNN debate you participated in your fellow candidates were damning you with faint praise.  You pretty much won that debate for preparedness and staying on message,  but when asked what he thought of your performance, one of the guys said in a dismissive tone, “She did alright” — the political equivalent of what husbands say when their wives ask if their pants make their butts look fat.

5. Remember to pay it forward. If and when you call out the media or another politician for their sexist jabs, do it not just for your Tea Party sisters, but for all women who take those hits.  Even if we don’t agree on anything else, we ought to be able to come together on the idea that no woman, especially an elected representative who’s running for president, should have to put up with the same treatment that Hillary (or Sarah Palin or any other woman) got when she was audacious enough to say, “I’m running for President of the United States.”

We know all candidates, men and women alike, should be ready for questions on their experience, policy positions, demeanor and world view to the extent that they impact decisions that would effect the whole country.  But for any woman who dares to think she can channel her inner Geena Davis, she’d buckle up. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Image via Minnesota Public Radio

As a former broadcast journalist myself, I know that the grind of doing interviews day in and day out can sometimes be tiring. But Kelly not only asked me about the “serious” business of women in the political world, but came up with this great political word game that I hope we get to play again soon!

If only I was in New York City today, where her offices and studios are, I think we’d be having a lively conversation about the Supreme Court’s decision dismissing the gender discrimination class action lawsuit filed against Wal-mart. I knew it would get dismissed because of procedural issues, but my gut tells me there’s a lot more going on in that decision than meets the eye. Can you say all out attempt by Wal-mart to keep women in low paying positions and keep the unions out at the same time?

(And, yes, I know — the humidity was wreaking havoc with my hair that day!)

But if she’s not running for the POTUS slot, how do you explain her decision to drive her big-a$$ tour bus straight through a tornado with her family aboard just to make sure she got to New Hampshire in time to steal Mitt Romney’s thunder for his 2012 bid announcement?  It’s certainly not on the list of approved Mama Grizzly cub parenting techniques.

Her actions are a sure sign that she’s going to announce her own presidential candidacy. And I haven’t even started on that whole Sarah Palin and her million dollar vanity movie thing.

Let’s be clear.  I’m not saying Sarah Palin wants to be President, or even that she wants to be on the campaign trail very long.  Palin is ruthless and ambitious — anyone who wants to be a major political player almost has to be these days.  But her goal isn’t the White House.  Her plan is to say she ran for President of the United States and then milk that for another four years of fame the way she did with her accidental vice presidential run.

Palin is a girl who knows how to bide her time when it comes to attention getting to further her own interests.  She knew there was no sense jumping in when the field was overly-crowded with the likes of Mitch Daniels, Mike Huckabee and Haley Barbour, three uber-conservatives the political right were hoping would be in the race for a while.

There’s nothing Palin hates more than someone horning in on her political space.   Just ask Michele Bachmann.  She’s made it clear that stealing attention away from Romney’s big announcement was political fair game, and you can be sure one of the other items on her 2012 “to do” list is to pit Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty against each other as fellow Minnesotans.  If she can get them out of the way, then she really just needs to worry about Jon Huntsman, who will be painted as an Obama Democrat in sheep’s clothing as he’s just coming off a stint as President Obama’s ambassador to China.

The problem with this potential Palin strategy for the GOP is this — once Palin has sucked all the air out of the political back rooms and dispatched her opponents, what will the Republicans do for a real candidate when she drops out, saying that she needs to spend more time to focus on her daughter Bristol, the single mom living in Hollywood with a couple of single guys for a TV reality show, two daughters still in school and a special needs toddler?  All the GOP will have left then will be anyone who has been hand-picked by Palin, who will serve to keep her in the spotlight as a presidential campaign advisor and give her access to the power influence she craves without any of the responsibility.

Palin and Donald “I might get back into the race” Trump just had a little Big Apple bonding time over pizza.  It’s not a leap to wonder if she sees Trump as the right person to step into that role for her in 2012.  If and when this scenario plays itself out, the Republicans just have to remember that they’re the ones who fed the Palin machine for their own purposes.  They’re going to have to live with the consequences.

Image via USA Today

Media-watchers and journalists have a slightly different question they need to answer as they cover this unfolding story – can the race between two women be written about without sexist undertones?

While just a year ago, The Week Online called the Tea Party duo the new face of the GOP, a recent article on Salon asked “Are We Ready for Two Women at Once?” And the Canadian Press recently ran a story entitled, “Two Women in a Political Race? Must Be a Catfight, According to Palin-Bachmann Buzz,” in which Deborah Walsh, the head of the Rutgers University Center for American Women and Politics lamented what she called the media’s “knee-jerk tendency” to portray competing female politicians as rivals who make the characters of the movie Mean Girls look tame.  Walsh said in that article that it’s shocking to her that in 2011, “You get two women in a race and it becomes a catfight.”

Yes – that’s where some are apparently going in political coverage.  A catfight. Somehow the recent race for the New York Congressional seat between Kathy Hochul and Jane Corwin escaped that sort of anti-woman tone.   It doesn’t look like we’re going to be so lucky when it comes to Palin and Bachmann even though Bachmann told George Stephanopoulos earlier this week, “I like Sarah Palin a lot. We’re friends. And I don’t consider her a competitor, I consider her a friend. But my comparison ultimately is to Barack Obama.”

In a recent piece at Politico entitled, “Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann Size Each Other Up,” journalists Ben Smith and Maggie Haberman wrote,  “… there are signs of tensions between the [Palin and Bachmann] camps. And the iron-clad laws of politics suggest there isn’t enough room for the two powerful personalities to occupy the same political space in 2012.”

I’m not sure what iron-clad laws of politics the authors are referring to, but on its face, there appears to be a growing meme that the GOP as a whole has to decide on either Palin or Bachmann before the primary season, implying that two women in the most high profile race in America is one woman too many.  As Democratic activist Christine Pelosi has noted, “There has been room in U.S. presidential primaries for multiple boring white guys for over two centuries; certainly there is room for two dynamic women in 2012.”

Reporting on the so-called debate about whether we can have more than one woman candidate per political party is, in and of itself, a piece of outdated sexism, similar to coverage of Hillary Clinton and Palin in 2008.  Clinton – a U.S. Senator at the time – was referred to as a nagging, bitchy woman who was playing the victim card.  Palin, then governor of Alaska, was subjected to endless questions about whether a mother of young children could—or even should – run for the VP slot, because, after all, how would she also have time to be pack the kids’ lunches or drive them to ice hockey practice?

In response to the Politico article, the publication engaged in an online “debate” at their “In the Arena” column, asking pundits and experts to weigh in on the substantive question of whether the 2012 GOP race has room for two women.  Some of the responses foreshadow the minefield that awaits reporters who will be trying to write about the Bachmann/Palin phenomenon without falling on a sexist landmine.

For example, former member of the New Hampshire State House of Representatives Fran Wendelboe says elbows will fly in what she called the upcoming political spectacle between two women.

Karen Floyd, former chairwoman of the South Carolina Republican Party, disagrees.  Floyd writes:

…why is this even a question?

Why are there not more woman offering themselves for the highest position in our country? Voters are certainly capable of discerning differences between candidates, whether the current comparison is two socially conservative, attractive, accomplished women such as Congresswoman Bachmann and Gov. Palin, or two socially conservative, attractive, accomplished men such as Congressman Ryan and Senator Santorum.

Democratic strategist Margie Omero takes exception with the idea that there’s only enough political oxygen in the 2012 race for one woman, even if they do have similar philosophies.   Omero says, “In an evolving field [of candidates] that is barely energizing anyone, [having this conversation] suggests it’s somehow wrong to have multiple women candidates. I think that’s more damaging than cartoonish ‘catfight’ language.”

Some online commentators are reiterating the “catfight” scenario.  Most reporters in mainstream outlets have steered clear of that phrase, though comparisons to characters in the movie Bridesmaids or political “frenemies” are starting to pop up.  Feminist author Gloria Feldt says journalists should use the presence of Palin and Bachmann in the same race as an opportunity in how such a scenario is described in their reporting.

“Journalists make their names by sharpening the issues,” says Feldt.  “There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Palin and Bachmann on the issues. So this is a good time to point out that ‘catfight’ [or other sexist language to describe their contest] is not an acceptable term, especially when there is no substantive difference; instead we should celebrate the presence of two politically ambitious women who are legitimately competing for the same position.”

Should reporters and editors keep a cheat sheet on their desks of words and phrases to steer clear of as we move forward in the lead-up to the 2012 presidential election?  If so, I’d suggest that “catty” and “claws are out” should go on that list, as well.  But Sandra Fish, a journalism instructor at the University of Colorado says, “I think most media are more likely to try to avoid such characterizations.  That said, I think it’s valid to compare the two women and their potential candidacies because they have similar ideologies and policy priorities and they both favor nontraditional techniques – like Bachmann giving her own state of the state response and Palin going on a bus tour with no media coverage.”

Of course, Palin and Bachmann could put an end to the discussion about how to cover them as political rivals by just announcing their Palin/Bachmann 2012 ticket.

Originally posted at Poynter Online.   Image via Politico.

When it comes to politicians, my list of no-no’s is a tad more serious. If  you’re an  anti-reproductive choice and/or anti-gay marriage candidate, I won’t listen to your fund-raising robo-calls — the political equivalent of not getting to first base.

I’m sure the GOP and “Tea Party” faithful have their own list of deal breakers.  But the way things are going these days — 17 months before the next presidential election — , those on the political right are quickly running out of viable contenders for the White House before this 2012 campaign even gets started.

For example, Newt Gingrich?  He has no chance.  He’s had three wives and the media has been uber-focused on his wife count.  But the real problem for Newt when it comes to his base won’t be his final spouse count — it will be the back story that’s going to kill his candidacy.  Will Newt treat his supporters in the less-than-respectable way he’s treated his ex-es?  Wife number one got dumped while she was in the hospital for cancer treatment and there are many reports that wife number two wasn’t, shall we say, getting Gingrich’s exclusive attention for a long time.  Mix that questionable personal integrity with criticizing his fellow Republicans and new information about that six-figure charge card debt at Tiffany’s, and it looks like Newt will be out of the race before he has to explain how he’s going to fix the country’s economic crisis while owing more for pricey jewelry than many people pay for their houses.

As for the others?  That necessary political magic combination of substance and optics is seriously lacking:

Mitt Romney — Health care for everyone was a fab idea when he was Massachusetts governor.  Now, not so much and that leaves him between a rock and hard place with both parties. And while it doesn’t bother me, apparently he has an addiction to Power Point presentations that might put voters to sleep.

Sarah Palin — Grammatically-challenged and easily distracted by bright, shiny objects, she might be the one they want, but she won’t be the one they get.   Aside from having to give up her lucrative speaking gigs, Palin knows that extreme social conservatives who love her won’t stand for Bristol-the-unwed-mom and her impressionable toddler son living quite publicly with two single Hollywood guys.  I’m guessing when Phyllis Schlafly caught wind of that one, her beehive just about blew up.

Michele Bachmann — Being geographically-challenged isn’t a good quality in a President.  I give her a lot of credit for managing 28 kids over her lifetime (five biological and 23 foster children) and she’s sure to be e darling of her Fire from the Heartland sisterhood, but even with her law degree, I think she needs a little primer on current events before the majority of Republicans consider her a possibility.

Tim Pawlenty — Can you really trust a former governor who seems to have a close personal relationship with Just for Men hair color?

Ron Paul — I’m not sure he’s going to get a lot of traction with a “Let Them Drink Unpasteurized Milk” platform.

Congressman Peter “I’m going to hold hearings on whether American Muslims are terrorists” King?  South Carolina Governor Nikki “the rumors of an affair with a blogger won’t die” Haley?

Bueller?

The last time a field of GOP presidential candidates looked like this, former Kansas Senator Bob Dole was the Republican choice, and we all know how that turned out.  So with the GOP field looking like that group of slightly nerdy high school kids who really hoped for a cool prom date, but ultimately had to go just as a group of platonic friends, it might be time for the Republican leadership to reach out to one of those dating services like eHarmony or Match.com to find their next superstar candidate for the base to fall in love with, because the normal selection process feels like going on a series of bad blind dates.

Maybe a few well-placed ads that read something like this?

Major political party ISO leader/partner, age 35+, with proven track record of truth,  frugality & fidelity. Knowledge of geography and grammar a plus.   Must be experienced in keeping commitments, both personal and professional.  Should love elephants, the American flag, long walks on the beach, porch swings and sunsets.

With Mike Huckabee and Donald Trump out (though I think we all have to admit at this point that Trump was never really in the race), Gingrich fading faster than you can say ‘I don’t know anything about that Tiffany gift box in the corner,’ and Palin more interested in millions of Facebook fans than millions of voters, if the GOP doesn’t act soon, they’re going to be left with former Minnesota Governor Pawlenty (a guy that most Americans have no idea of) or Speaker of the House John Boehner and his ‘tears are the new black’ approach to political engagement.

Not that a field of less than stellar GOP candidates really bothers me all that much!

Image via Tiffany & Co.