To Baker, it is Clinton’s gender that is a big, big stop sign. He doesn’t seem to see a failure on the part of any of these potential male candidates to do the years and years of work it requires to become a contender. Nope, all of them are just afraid to run against Clinton because she is a woman — not because she has a much higher profile, much better presidential resume and political network.
He calls this failure or fear of going “toe-to-toe with a powerful woman is, in the final analysis, a form of patronizing that ill-becomes a party that has stood so steadfastly for women.”
But haven’t male Democrats run against women before, you might ask? Yes, they most certainly have. Like in 2008, for instance. That contest was rough and tumble early on, with none of the candidates shaking in their boots at the thought of challenging Clinton, who after all was a powerful woman back then, too.
