A Country Fearful of a Fearless Woman

It’s been just 72 hours since Senator Kamala Harris announced she would be suspending her presidential campaign. And already, there’s been a wave of analysis about her descent from top tier candidate to single digit polling to non-contender.

In reality, the reason she had to end her campaign is simple. On an increasingly white, male, rich playing field Kamala chose to be brave, not perfect. And we punished her for it. Her campaign slogan was “fearless,” not flawless. And media, culture, voters, couldn’t live with that.

Because this country isn’t ready for fearless women, for brave women. Not really. And so we scrutinized her within an inch of her life. We put her record, her demeanor, her strategy, her staff, her family under a microscope. We held her to a higher standard than every single one of her fellow candidates.

The headlines make it seem like she couldn’t get anything right. She lacked momentum. She didn’t pay enough attention to Iowa. She had an irreparable record on crime. Her campaign was full of infighting. Underfunded. Outspent. Unelectable. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a story about how the colorway of her t-shirts failed to deliver voters in rural America.

Consider the question of her qualifications, which according to some were thin. Sen. Harris is a U.S. senator elected with 7.5 million votes. By comparison, Pete Buttigieg is a 37-year-old mayor with no federal or state government experience elected with just over 8,500 votes; and Andrew Yang is an entrepreneur with no prior political experience whatsoever.

Consider the question of her record on crime. As a prosecutor, Sen. Harris took a tough-on-crime approach at a time when women and black candidates “faced intense pressure” to do so. By comparison, rightly pointed out by Campaign Zero co-founder Samuel Sinyangwe and many others, Vice President Biden is leading in the polls despite writing the Crime Bill and Mayor Pete is up in the polls even after his police force killed a black man during the campaign.

Consider even the spotlight on her campaign’s workplace culture, which seemed to many to be the nail in her coffin. Sen. Harris faced criticism for a dysfunctional, mismanaged, and mistreated staff. But it’s no coincidence that the two candidates who’ve had media laser-focus on their workplace cultures are women. It’s well-documented that women face higher penalties for ethical transgressions than men do.

Let me be clear: I did not endorse Senator Harris for President, nor have I endorsed any of the Presidential hopefuls. And to be sure, she is not without flaws. But I would have liked the chance to see a black woman on the ballot, to have her ideas in the running. We didn’t just deserve Sen. Harris’ voice, we needed it. With her gone, as Sen. Booker said, we’ll have more billionaires than black people at the next debate.

When she announced her campaign on Martin Luther King Day, drawing a crowd 20,000 strong, Sen. Harris proclaimed, “Lord knows, I am not perfect. But I will always speak with decency and moral clarity.” The Senator made good on her promise, but we failed to meet her even halfway.

If we want more women in public office, we have to let them run — bravely, authentically and sometimes even messily. We have to check ourselves when we question their credentials or their “likability.” It’s a courtesy we don’t hesitate to extend to their male counterparts.

We need to give these women the space to be brave not perfect, or we will all suffer the consequences. Worse, our Democracy will.